1 2025:CGHC:41057 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4368 of 2025 1 - Smt. Devki Bai Khare W/o. Late Than Singh Khare, Aged About 41 Years R/o. Dengrapara, Koba, Tehsil Balod, District Balod (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, M 2-01, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, Chhattisgarh 492002 2 - Collector, District Balod Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divisional Magistrate (Revenue) District Balod (C.G.) 4 - Tehsildar, District Balod (C.G.) 5 - Deputy Director, Veterinary Services, District Balod (C.G.) ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For petitioners : Mr. Aniruddh Singh, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. A.G. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 14/08/2025 1. By way of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is not challenging any particular order but seeking direction for respondent authorities to grant sanction compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/- on account of death of Petitioner's son due to biting of a stray dog on 30.03.2024. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 30.03.2024 at Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.08.23 12:39:29 +0530 2 01:45 PM, the son of the Petitioner ie. Late Shri Krishna Khare was admitted in the Government Medical College, Rajnandgaon. The medical report states that the deceased was not taking food and water and sweating profusely in the past two days. The report also recorded that the deceased was bite by a dog two months ago. Unfortunately. the deceased died in the Medical Ward of the Hospital at 09:49 PM on 30.03.2024. The immediate cause of death was recorded as deep dog bite disorder. It is pertinent to mention here that the husband of the Petitioner also died untimely at the age of 44 years on 14.12.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Petitioner filed an application for financial relief before the Respondent No. 2 and the same was received by the Respondent No. 2 on 26.03.2025. Subsequently, the Petitioner filed an application under the Right To Information Act, 2005 seeking certified copy of action taken by the Respondent No. 2 upon the application for compensation filed by the Petitioner. The Respondent No. 2 forwarded the application for compensation to the Respondent No. 5 vide Letter dated 02.05.2025 on the ground that the subject matter relates to office of Respondent No. 5. In response, the Respondent No. 5 issued a letter dated 05.05.2025 wherein it was stated that since the State Government does not sanction any funds to Respondent No. 5 for grant of compensation, the application was remanded back to Respondent No. 2 for necessary action. Consequently, the Respondent No. 5 also issued a letter dated 13.05.2025 to the Petitioner wherein the Petitioner was requested to contact Respondent No. 2 for compensation. It is pertinent to mention here that till date the Respondent authorities have not considered neither decided the application for compensation filed by the petitioner. 4. In support of this contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the matter of State of Chhattisgarh and others V. Bhaiya Lal Gond, in Writ Appeal No. 409/2020. The petitioner 3 also relied upon a decision of this Court in the matter of Vijay Das Manikpuri Vs. State of Chhattisgarh passed in WPC No. 4652/2019. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contented that the application which the petitioner has filed before the Collector District Balod, is still pending. The application of the petitioner dated 19.03.2025 shall be considered in accordance with law. 6. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 7. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the matter of State of Chhattisgarh and others V. Bhaiya Lal Gond, in Writ Appeal No. 409/2020 held as follows:- 33. To conclude, we direct that (i) the ex- gratia payment to the respondents as per the notification from occurrence of stray dog bite death would be Rs. 6,50,000/- and would be paid to the dependent of each victim family within a period of 45 days, failing which, it will carry interest @ 6% per annum; (ii) Apart from the aforesaid gratuitous payment, the family of the victim would be entitled to claim their right for further compensation, if so advised, which would be dependent on the fact finding enquiry of each individual case; and (iii) the State would be obliged to give a wide publicity of anti viral dog bite 8. Similarly, the decision of the Hon’ble Court in the matter of Vijay Das Manikpuri Vs. State of Chhattisgarh passed in WPC No. 4652/2019 also held that Keeping in mind above decisions as also considering all the aspects of the matter, particularly that it is not in dispute that daughter of petitioner died due to complications of a stray dog bite, I deem it fit to award a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- as ex gratia / 4 compensation to the petitioner. This amount of compensation shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order, failing which it will carry interest @ 6% p.a. till the actual payment is made. 9. Considering the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, instead of keeping this petition pending, this Court finds it appropriate to dispose the present writ petition directing the respondent-authorities to decide the application/representation dated 19.03.2025 (Annexure P/4), subject to fact finding enquiry within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti