THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.5368 of 2006 Between:
Durgaiah Rajaiah PETITIONER AND
1. The Joint Secretary, Special Kuwait Cell, Ministry of External Affairs, ISIL Building, 9, Bhagwan Das Road, Opp. Supreme Court, New Delhi-110 001, and others.
RESPONDENTS ORDER:
This writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questions the action of the respondents in not paying compensation awarded by the United Nations Compensation Commission in favour of Gulf War victims during the year 1990-91, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.
2. Heard Sri N. Parmeswara Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. K. Manideepika, learned counsel for the 1st respondent, apart from perusing the material available on record. None appears for respondents 2 to 4 despite service of notices.
3. The pleaded case of the petitioner is as under:
The family of the petitioner, during the Gulf War in the year 1990-91, returned to India. The United Nations Compensation Commission at Geneva announced compensation to Gulf war victims and in response to the announcement made by the External Affairs Ministry, Special Kuwait Cell, New Delhi, the petitioner submitted an application in a prescribed form to the 1st respondent-authority, and the 1st respondent-authority identified the petitioner for payment of compensation. United Nations Compensation Commission at Geneva approved compensation of US $ 5068.78 in favour of the petitioner and he also opened an account in Indian Overseas Bank, Karimnagar Branch bearing account No. ISKC SB A/C No.18251, dated 24.10.1994. The petitioner received an intimation dated 10.08.1999 from the 1st respondent informing that the approved amount of US $ 5068.78 was credited to his account, but the 3rd respondent paid only an amount of US $ 2500 to the petitioner and the rest of the amount was not paid.
4. The grievance of the petitioner, precisely, in the present writ petition is that despite a legal notice dated 30.01.2006 got issued to respondents 2 and 3, no action has been taken so far by them in the direction of payment of balance amount to him.
5. This Court as long back as on 18.03.2006 issued Rule Nisi. Despite the same, no counter affidavits have been filed by the respondents so far. It is also submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent that despite the communication sent to respondents 2 to 4 no response has been received so far.
6. Obviously, keeping in view the plight and difficulties of the Gulf War victims, United Nations Compensation Commission announced compensation to the victims. It is highly unfortunate that despite service of notices long back, no counter affidavits have been filed by respondents 2 to 4 in the direction of either denying the averments made in the writ affidavit or in the direction of justifying the impugned action, nor responded to the legal notice got issued by the petitioner. This attitude on the part of respondents 2 to 4 is highly unreasonable, preposterous and reprehensible. In these circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition basing on the material available on record.
7. For the afore said reasons, this writ petition is disposed of, permitting the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents 2 to 4 for redressal of his grievance within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any such representation is made within the time stipulated, respondents 2 to 4 shall take appropriate action in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter and communicate the orders thereon to the petitioner. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any shall stand closed.
JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI.
23rd July, 2014 Js.