Shocking Apathy: Compensation For Electrical Accidents In India

Electricity Act, 2003, the complete code on electricity, substantially distanced the executive from tariff fixation, regulation and some dispute resolution functions entrusted to the quasi-judicial bodies called Electricity Regulatory Commission. The regulators have no power to settle consumer grievances or award compensation for accident victims. Thus, this law merely ensured that consumers periodically pay as per regulated and guaranteed returns to the electricity utilities and private sector generating companies, including renewable energy companies. The largest beneficiaries of this regime are the open access users - large industrial and commercial consumers - who are outside the regulatory control ambit. Large generators and traders compete with each other to cherry-pick large a lucrative consumer but small and marginal consumers left to the mercy of monopolised distribution utilities. New set of intermediaries like electricity trading companies and energy exchanges immensely benefited with assured trading margins without any infrastructure investments. The consumers gleefully pay for all and remain avoidable constituent in the entire equation.

Billions of worth of transmission infrastructure was created to benefit the large power companies by acquiring millions of acres of lands. As pre the recent research study, the total land footprint needed to meet India's renewable energy target ranges from ~55,000 km² to 125,000 km² , which equals the size of Himachal Pradesh or Chhattisgarh, respectively. Since these lands are mostly acquired by private companies, the compensation structures of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 do not apply. In fact, a pre-constitutional era legislation – Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 – is invoked to force the land owners from parting lands without adequate compensation. In almost every case, passion is taken by power companies without paying compensation citing the legal provisions of the colonial era. Thus, a fair and proper compensation structure must be ensured for the small and marginal farmers. One of the models that legislature can consider is to make the farmers stakeholders in the profits derived from the power companies by signing joint Power Purchase Agreements involving land owners, generators and power utilities.

The 2003 Act, which is regarded as complete code on electricity, is devoid of any compensation mechanism for the small and marginal farmers who lost their lands for establishment of generating stations, substations and transmission lines for the energy projects, more particularly, the renewable energy projects like wind and solar.

Even acute is the vulnerability of victims who lose their lives everyday due to electrical accidents. Small and marginal farmers and landless agricultural workers remain the biggest victims of this phenomenon largely eulogised across the globe as energy independence.

First off, the central electricity authority and chief electrical inspectors, which have the statutory duty to ensure certify the safety of electricity plants and machines, hardly visit the project locations to inspect the electrical safety of these installations before or after the projects. In result, sagging electric lines and faulty current transformers imperil millions of lives across India. Thus, pre-commissioning and periodic electrical inspections remain a mere sham. No responsibility, much less personal responsibility is fixed on the officials for their laxity and negligence. If every electrical accident is traced to the jurisdictional electrical inspector of the state government and electrical engineer of the distribution company, one can witness phenomenal drop in the mishaps.

Laxity on the part of the of the central government is no less as Central Electricity Authority (CEA) has not even bothered to compile the data on electrical accidents after 2015. Even the data compiled up to 2015 has huge gaps with majority of states not bothering report the accidents, leave apart the causes for it.

In 2002, the Apex Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board Vs. Shail Kumari and Ors summarily dismissed an appeal filed by an electricity boards by holding that strict liability principle is applicable to the acts and omissions of an electricity supply utility in case of electrical accidents. This remains good law even to this date. However, the victims of electrical accidents have not been conferred with a fast track and cost-effective compensation adjuration mechanism as is available in the form of Motor Vehicle Accidents Tribunals (MACTs). Presently, the victims are relegated to the civil courts wherein they have to file civil suits by paying ad valorem court fee and invoke the provisions of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855. This a highly time consuming and frustrates the poor and hapless victim families.

Thus, the second most important legislative reform in this regard has to be in the form of constitution of a special tribunal for award of compensation. The better option could be to either delegate this power to the MACTs or empower the regulatory commissions. What is important is that except in cases of exceptions formulated by means of case law to the doctrine of strict liability, the responsibility in case of each electrical accidents must be fixed on the electrical inspectors of the State Government run electrical inspectorates and officials of the electricity supply companies.

The third intervention that must be ensured in regarding the award of adequate and uniform solatium. In almost all states, the regulators have determined the solatium for fatal and non-fatal accidents. For instance, in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, the solatium in case of fatal electrical accident has been determined as 5 Lakhs. However, In Bihar, Telangana and Odisha, it is fixed at 4 Lakhs. There is no uniformity in the compensation quantum.

These solatium amounts are no fault liability compensations wherein the Supply Companies need not admit their liability but award the same as an immediate succour to the grieving families. But most victims are totally unaware either of the existence of the solatium or are under an impression that once these amounts are accepted, they are precluded from procuring additional quantum. To add to this confusion KPTCL, the utility in Karnataka has issued a circular disturbingly says that once this solatium (what they term as compensation is received by the victim), she's barred from invoking other remedies. Given this anomaly, most victims are varied of availing solatium and are left high and dry in fighting litigations.

This injustice of foreclosing the rights of the victims by throwing at them some paltry amounts as one time settlement of compensation must be immediately checked by the legislative and in case by the judiciary.

Each State Government and Distribution Company must be made to establish a helpline with a nodal officer and an Ombudsman for immediate disbursement of compensation. An Ombudsman structure for consumer grievance redressal is already appointed under section 42 of the 2003 Act is already in place. This can be extended to the accident victims as well. The victims must also be made aware that this is merely a solatium and they have every right to avail resources available to them under law. Alongside, legislative must establish Electricity Accident Claims Tribunals, as aforesaid. One other legislative intervention to abolish payment of ad valorem court fee by accident victims will go a long way in ensuring justice to the claimants.

These measures can ensure that a grand vision of an energy independent India is built on the edifice of an equitable compensation structure.

Views are personal.

The Author is an Advocate practicing at the High Court of Karnataka