Vypeen tragedy victims get justice at last

By Our Staff Reporter

KOCHI, JULY 28. For the hapless surviving victims and the next of kin of those killed in the 1982 Vypeen liquor tragedy, the recent Kerala High court directive for paying compensation of Rs. 1 lakh each has not come a day too soon.

In fact, their legal battle for getting compensation had been a long and protracted one. But more than the relief, what makes the judgment significant is that it fixes the responsibility on the State Government for the tragedy. Besides, it is all the more relevant, especially in the context of a clutch of hooch tragedies that have struck the State of late.

The tragedy had claimed a toll of 71 lives and many drinkers lost their eyesight. The tipplers had their drink (arrack spiked with methyl alcohol) from the licenced shops. The victims of the tragedy, which occurred on the Onam day of 1982 in the Vypeen Island off Kochi, approached the High Court in 1993 following their vain attempts to secure compensation through the civil courts under private law.

In fact, the civil court had ordered compensation but the decree could not be executed against the Abkari contractors as they had been declared insolvent by then. Their efforts to get compensation from the Government through the civil court had also fallen through as the deadline for filing damage suits against the Government officials prescribed under section 80 of the civil procedure code was over. Though the abkari contractors were convicted and awarded life imprisonment by the Supreme court, the next of kin of those killed did not remain content with the apex court verdict.

The Division bench of the High Court has awarded compensation on the ground that the tragedy occurred because the State Government and its excise officials utterly failed to discharge their official duties properly. The Supreme Court has laid down that under public law (meaning under the writ jurisdiction of the court) `the wrong doer' can be penalised and can fix the liability for public wrongs on the State Government which has failed in its duty to protect the fundamental rights of the citizen. The apex court had also observed that when it comes to violation of fundamental rights or enforcement of public duties, "the remedy would still be available under the public law notwithstanding the fact that a civil suit could be filed for damages under private law". In fact, the apex court had awarded compensation through its verdicts to many victims on these grounds. In this context, the High Court was of the opinion that the State Government could be made liable when a fundamental right of a person is violated.

The legal issue in the case was that whether the excise officials had exercised their duties in accordance with the statutory provision. The petitioners stance was that the licencees (contractors) could not have resorted to adulteration of arrack if the officers had complied with the statutory provisions which safeguard against adulteration of liquor. The High Court held the view that there was lack of vigil, supervision and proper exercise of statutory duties by the officers. The findings of the Justice Janakiamma Commission which went into the liquor tragedy is that there was "grave failure" on the part of the officers of the excise department. Since the State Government had taken upon itself the task of monitoring the trade in arrack, it is "its duty to see that the public is offered arrack of the right quality", the High Court pointed out.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Southern States
Previous : Hamstrung Bangalore police come under fire
Next     : Silent Valley, 'world's natural heritage site'