Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 15897 (CHH)

NETRAM VERMA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/1825/2022 · 2025-01-08

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:1097 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1825 of 2022 1 Netram Verma S/o Bharat Lal Verma Aged About 39 Years Resident Of Village - Khapradih, Police Station And Tahsil -Suhela, District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 The Director, Directorate Of Health Services, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 The Chief Medical And Health Officer, District -Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 4 Dr. Pramod Tiwari S/o Late Vanshraj Tiwari The Then Posted As Block Medical Officer, Community Health Centre, Balodabazar, District - Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Anil S. Pandey, Advocate For Respondent(s) / State : Shri R.K. Gupta, Addl. A.G. 2 Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 08/01/2025 Heard. 1. By the present writ petition the petitioner is seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by C.G. Human Rights Commission, Raipur and also seeking an award of Rs. 15 Lakhs as compensation in favour of the petitioner in addition to the sum awarded by the C.G. Human Rights Commission with interest @ 18% from the date of death of the wife of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that wife of the petitioner was admitted in Community Health Centre, Balodabazar on 22.12.20211 for sterilization operation and respondent No. 4, who is a Doctor conducted the operation in a negligent manner without any prescription. He further submits that after the operation, condition of wife of petitioner namely Smt. Tameshwari Verma deteriorated and was not able to breath for which she was again admitted to the Community Health Centre, Balodabazar on 25.12.2011. It is submitted that on the said day respondent No. 4 referred Smt. Tameshwari VErma to Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur and subsequently she was admitted to a private hospital as indoor patient for a period of 5 days and thereafter on 28.02.2012, she died during the treatment. Thereafter, petitioner logged a compliant before the C.G. Human Rights Commission, Raipur, who awarded Rs. 2 Lakhs in favour of the petitioner. However, the petitioner is not satisfied with the award made by the C.G. Human Right Commission, he preferred the present writ petition seeking compensation of Rs. 15 Lakhs from the respondent. 3 3. Learned State counsel submits that the present writ petition for enhancement of award passed by the C.G. Human Right Commission, Raipur is not maintainable under Article 226 of Constitution of India and the compensation sought by the petitioner is for negligence in treatment by the hospital and doctor, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court as disputed facts are involved. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Perusal of the documents and contention of the parties shows that C.G. Human Rights Commission, Raipur has awarded Rs. 2 Lakhs in favour of the petitioner, however, the petitioner is questioning the same and seeking enhancement being not satisfied with the said award and seeking direction towards the respondent to pay Rs. 15 Lakhs as compensation in favour of the petitioner on the allegation that the wife of the petitioner died because of the negligent treatment by the respondent. The compensation sought by the petitioner alleging negligence cannot be adjudicated in writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India as several disputed facts are involved. 6. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed off with the liberty that if petitioner is not satisfied with the award made by the C.G. Human Rights Commission, Raipur and if the petitioner is seeking further compensation he can approach the authority or forum by filling a Civil Suit before the jurisdictional Civil Court, if so advised. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti