Mrs. K.S. Yaomila vs The State Of Manipur

Wlcome to new blog. This blog is based on the legal facts discussed in Mrs. K.S. Yaomila vs The State Of Manipur decided on 6 January, 2020 by Manipur High Court.

In Somi Kamkar Vs. State of Manipur & ors, WP(C) No.894 of 2017 it was held that Compensation can be broadly divided into two- one, a compensation that can be claimed in private law and two, a compensation that can be claimed in public law for violation of fundamental rights.

In Somi Kamkar Vs. State of Manipur & ors, WP(C) No.894 of 2017 it was held that The law relating to payment of compensation on account of the violation of fundamental rights, is no longer res integra.

Public law proceedings serve a different purpose than the private law proceedings. Award of compensation for established infringement of the indefeasible rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution is a remedy available in public law since the purpose of public law is not only to civilise public power but also to assure the citizens that they live under a legal system wherein their rights and interests shall be protected and preserved. Grant of compensation in proceedings under Article 32 or Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the established violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21, is an exercise of the courts under the public law jurisdiction for penalising the wrongdoer and fixing the liability for the public wrong on the State which failed in the discharge of its public duty to protect the fundamental rights of the citizen.

The courts have the obligation to satisfy the social aspirations of the citizens because the courts and the law are for the people and expected to respond to their aspirations. A court of law cannot close its consciousness and aliveness to stark realities.

Article 32 is not powerless to assist a person when he finds that his fundamental right has been violated. He can in that event seek remedial assistance under Article 32. The power of the court to grant such remedial relief may include the power to award compensation in appropriate cases.

It is not in every case where there is a breach of a fundamental right committed by the violator that compensation would be awarded by the court in a petition under Article 32.

The High Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is competent to award compensation in cases where the fundamental rights, guaranteed in the Constitution of India, have been infringed by the State authorities.

it is difficult for any court to lay down rigid tests which should be applied in all situations and that in the Indian context, various factors like educational qualification, nature of job, past performance, scope of higher salary, the expenditure that the claimant has incurred and is likely to incur, family dependence, inflation etc. should be taken into consideration.

================

Please donate for my notes.