Supreme Court Slams Uttarakhand Govt For Not Paying Promised Ex-Gratia For Doctor Shot Dead In Hospital, Orders ₹1 Crore Compensation

The Supreme Court recently criticised the Uttarakhand Government for not paying ex-gratia compensation to the widow of a government doctor, who was shot dead while working in a Community Health Centre in April 2016, despite the then Chief Minister approving a decision to grant Rs 50 Lakh.

Displeased that the family of the deceased doctor has been forced to litigate for nearly nine years to get compensation, the Court directed the State to pay them Rs 1 crore.

"We are prima facie of the view that even after approval of the proposal to pay Rs. 50 lakhs to the family of deceased by the Chief Secretary, it has not been honoured and the family is litigating since more than nine years. The request made by family to release the sanctioned amount was not acceded to on the pretext of non- approval of the release of the said amount. In our view, looking to the gravity of the incident, the sanction must be honoured and the amount be paid along with interest. Thus, adding interest for about 9 years, we quantity the amount in total Rs.1 crore," the Court ordered.

"The Government through the Chief Secretary had proposed to pay at least a sum of Rs.50 lakhs financial assistance as ex-gratia payment to the family of the deceased doctor who was shot dead in hospital during working by assailants. The said note was approved by the Chief Minister of the State at the relevant point of time. Later, only a sum of Rs.1 lakh was paid on the pretext that under the Rules, such huge amount cannot be paid," the Court noted.

A bench comprising Justice J K Maheshwari and Justice Aravind Kumar passed the order in a Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Uttarakhand, against a direction passed by the Uttarakhand High Court in 2018 to pay compensation of Rs.1.99 Crore to the widow of the doctor along with interest 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the petition. The High Court also directed the State to enforce the provisions of 'The Uttarakhand Medicare Service Persons and Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property) Act, 2013 and to release extraodinray pensionary benefits to the doctor's family. 

The High Court noted that the Chief Secretary to the State of Uttarakhand made a proposal to the Chief Minister on 26.5.2016 to pay Rs 50 lakhs ex-gratia compensation, which was approved.

"The petitioner's husband was discharging the official duties at CHC, Jaspur. He was shot dead on 20.4.2016. The Hon'ble Chief Minister has agreed to pay compensation of Rs.50.00 lakh but till date, only a sum of Rs.1.00 lakh has been paid to the petitioner. It was the duty cast upon the State Government to protect the life of petitioner's husband. He was on duty as per the averments made in the petition. Killing a doctor, while on duty, amounts to negation of rule of law," the High Court observed in its order. After the High Court dismissed the State's review petition in October 2020, the SLP was filed in the Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme Court, the State contended that the family had already been granted leave encashment, GPF, family pension, gratuity, and GIS. Additionally, the deceased doctor's son was appointed as a Junior Assistant in the Health Department on compassionate grounds in compliance with a Supreme Court interim order from October 18, 2021. The State also informed the Court that ₹10 lakh, as previously directed, had been paid to the family.

Therefore, the State argued that the computation of the compensation by the High Court applying the multiplier method was not sustainable.

The doctor's family maintained that if the promised compensation had been disbursed in 2016, they would not have been forced into prolonged litigation.

After hearing the arguments, the Supreme Court ordered the State to pay Rs 1 crore. Since an amount of Rs 11 lakhs has already been paid to the family, the Court directed the payment of the balance of Rs 89 lakhs.

The matter will be considered again on April 22 to ascertain compliance.

Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia appeared for the State.

Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria appeared for the respondent

Case : The State of Uttarakhand v Sarita Singh and others | SLP (c) 19840-19841/2021

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 348

Click here to read the order