![]() Monday, Apr 28, 2003 |
| Opinion | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Opinion
-
Editorials
MONEY CAN NEVER compensate for the loss of loved ones, but the Delhi High Court's ruling in the Uphaar cinema case is a landmark one. The court's award of over Rs. 20 crores (including interest) to the families of 157 people who were either killed or injured while watching a film in the Delhi cinema hall is the highest compensation awarded through civil remedy. In arriving at the decision, the court had to grapple with the complex question of how to apportion blame in this "betrayal of trust" (to use the judge's expression) that resulted in the death of 59 people. Fixing liability is a straightforward matter in most fire cases. The Uphaar case, however, was complicated by the question about who should pay (and in what proportion) for the tragedy. Those who built and managed the cinema hall? The wings of the administration that issued them licences without satisfactorily checking the safety of the premises? And so on. The court has addressed this question by not merely examining the role of the licensee, but all those public agencies that contributed to the negligence in this case the Delhi Vidyut Board, the Municipal Corporation and the licensing wing of the Delhi police (which together were asked to bear 45 per cent of the compensation). The Division Bench hearing the case made it clear that it wanted to send a firm message that violations relating to public safety will no longer be tolerated and all those responsible for maintaining such safety may be held accountable. Apart from being directed to bear 55 per cent of the compensation, the owners of the cinema hall were slapped with punitive damages of Rs. 2.5 crores, a figure based on the illegal profits the cinema hall made through ticket sales for unauthorised seats from the time it was built in 1979 to the time it burnt down in 1996. This sum of money will be set aside for the setting up of an Accident Trauma Centre at Delhi's All India Institute of Medical Sciences to help victims of disasters. Significantly, the setting up of such a centre was a demand made by the petitioners, the Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy (AVUT), and the Delhi Government's counsel had informed the court during the hearings that a sum of Rs. 54 crores has been sanctioned for this purpose. One of the many shocking facts about the Uphaar tragedy is the manner in which the management had flouted all rules positioning extra seats in the front of the exit passage, blocking staircases that led out from the balcony by renting the space out and keeping the cinema hall going without a proper permit. If the Uphaar incident shocked the conscience of the nation, it was partly because of the truly appalling mix of callousness and negligence that permitted it to happen. The disturbing thing is that very little seems to have been learnt from it. Fire disaster management techniques in cities have not improved much. Worse, little seems to have been done about multi-storeyed buildings that do not adhere to fire safety norms, even those without simple requirements such as having basic fire fighting equipment and proper pathways for fire engines to go around. Occupants and owners routinely ignore the notices sent to these buildings and, as a result, large number of Indians in cities and towns continue to live and work in fire-traps. Even cinema halls in many cities continue to flout safety norms, a clear illustration that the lessons of the Uphaar tragedy have not been learnt. Many fire accident cases end with the injured being compensated (usually in the form of `relief' from the Government) and nothing being done to penalise the guilty. As a result, the agencies responsible for the accident are not coerced into mending their ways. What the Delhi High Court has done is to signal that those charged with enforcing public safety norms will be made to pay (and heavily) for lapses. Its judgment represents a small but important step in the effort to make our cities safer places to live in.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|