Calcutta High Court Seeks State Gov's Response In PIL Seeking Compensation For Victims Of Tiger Attacks In Sunderbans

Update: 2022-02-28 15:33 GMT
story

The Calcutta High Court on Monday sought the State government's response in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition pertaining to the grant of compensation to the family members of tiger attacked victims in the Sundarban area. The PIL filed by an organisation called the Dakshinbanga Matsyajbi Forum alleged that there is no proper State government scheme for providing compensation to...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Calcutta High Court on Monday sought the State government's response in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition pertaining to the grant of compensation to the family members of tiger attacked victims in the Sundarban area. 

The PIL filed by an organisation called the Dakshinbanga Matsyajbi Forum alleged that there is no proper State government scheme for providing compensation to the family members of such victims and further sought data pertaining to the total number of victims who had fallen prey to such tiger attacks. 

The counsel appearing for the petitioner apprised a Bench comprising Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj many villagers venture into forests in the Sundarban area for their livelihood and subsequently become victims of such tiger attacks. 

He also apprised the Bench that there is no substantial government scheme for 'tiger widows', women whose husbands have been killed by tigers while they were fishing, catching crabs or collecting honey for their livelihood.

At this point, the Chief Justice enquired whether the plea related to only women who lost their husbands and not husbands who lost their wives to such tiger attacks. In response, the counsel clarified that the plea pertained to grant of compensation for both that is all family members of victims. 

Advocate General S.N Mookherjee appearing for the State apprised the Court that the State government provides compensation to victims who had ventured into 'buffer zones' but not 'core zone' of the jungle since entry into the core zone is prohibited. 

Taking cognisance of the grievance raised, the Court directed the State government to file its response and accordingly directed, 

"Learned Advocate General seeks 4 weeks time to file a report in the form of affidavit, thereafter exception to the report be filed within two weeks."

The matter is slated to be heard next on April 25

Case Title: Dakshinbanga Matsyajbi Forum and Anr v. State of West Bengal 

Click Here To Read/Download Order 


Tags:    

Similar News