Carmel school tragedy: High Court directs Chandigarh Administration to pay Rs 1.5 crore compensation

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday directed the Chandigarh Administration to pay Rs 1 crore to the father of a student, who tragically lost her life, and Rs 50 lakh to another girl, who lost her arm after a massive tree branch fell on children at Carmel Convent School in July 2022.

Rejecting the administration’s defence that the mishap was an “act of God”, the court held the UT liable for negligence and admonished it for showing “a lack of empathy and sensitivity” in resisting the compensation claim.

“This conduct reflects a lack of empathy and sensitivity on the part of the Chandigarh Administration,” Justice Kuldeep Tiwari observed while noting that the UT readily implemented all remedial measures recommended by an inquiry committee except the direction for compensation.

Court’s admonition

The bench expressed “grave concern” over the administration’s handling of the matter. “Following the tragic incident, there was widespread public outcry… To show active engagement, the Chandigarh Administration constituted a committee led by a retired judge of this high court which conducted the inquiry. The Chandigarh Administration not only accepted all the recommendations and remedial measures proposed by the committee but also ensured their implementation. However, when it came to the recommendation regarding the payment of compensation due to the established negligence of the engineering department, the Chandigarh Administration resorted to various legal technicalities, including the assertion that such a recommendation exceeded the committee’s terms of reference.”

The injured student and the father of the victim girl were represented by advocates Ramandeep Pratap Singh and Sahil Koul, while the school represented by advocates Gautam Dutt and Prachi Gupta.

Maintainability of plea

Justice Tiwari asserted that the injured victims were entitled to maintain the writ petition. “The negligent act of one of the wings of the Chandigarh Administration has resulted in the loss of a precious young life, besides resulting in injuries of varying degrees and severity to several others. Therefore, it is well within the right of the injured victims to enforce their legal right protected by the Constitution of India, and since there has been breach of their fundamental rights, they can well maintain a petition for award of monetary compensation.”

Quoting the maxim “Ubi Jus Ibi Remedium” signifying “where there is a right, there is a remedy”, Justice Tiwari asserted: “No wrong should go without redress, and only by this way, the courts can establish faith in the rule of law.”

Committee’s mandate

Appearing before Justice Tiwari’s bench, the UT argued that Justice Jitendra Chauhan Committee exceeded its mandate by recommending compensation. Dismissing the submission, the bench ruled the committee was constituted not only to ascertain the facts and fix responsibility, but also to recommend remedial actions to be taken. “Such remedial actions are not confined merely to measures aimed at preventing recurrence of a similar incident, but also encompass actions relating to providing adequate medical assistance to the injured and awarding appropriate compensation to the injured or the families of the deceased. Consequently, this court can safely hold that the committee has not exceeded its mandate in recommending compensation.”

Negligence established

Justice Tiwari upheld the committee’s finding that the engineering department was negligent. “The Chandigarh Administration never disputed the finding of negligence attributed to the engineering department in the inquiry report furnished by the committee. What is further significant is that the Chandigarh Administration, except for complying with the recommendation regarding payment of compensation, has complied with most of the other recommendations and has also taken necessary action to implement the remedial measures.”

‘Act of God’ plea rejected

Rejecting UT’s argument that the incident was an “act of God”, Justice Tiwari added it had clearly come on record and established that the Chandigarh Administration did not adopt scientific methods to ascertain the health of the heritage tree suffering from disease ‘heart rot’. “Had such scientific assessment been made at the relevant time, the present tragic incident could have been avoided. Furthermore, the restriction imposed upon the caretakers of the heritage tree(s) to prune the extra branches aggravated the cause. Accordingly, the submission … that the incident constituted an act of God is hereby rejected….

The negligence, as attributed to the engineering department by the committee, is affirmed.”

Irreparable loss

The court took note of the trauma suffered by the victims. The bench observed one student, aged 15, had her left arm amputated, underwent multiple surgeries, and continued to require assistance in daily activities. “This incident has also limited her future career opportunities and may impact her prospects for marriage,” the bench noted.

Her classmate’s father suffered “the irreplaceable loss of his minor daughter, a bright student with promising potential. She could have brought laurel and acclaim to her parents, but this tragic incident shattered the aspirations and dreams of her parents. It is difficult to fathom the pain which the parents have suffered on account of loss of their minor daughter, and no amount can compensate this loss”.

Directions issued

Before parting with the verdict, the high court issued a series of directions to the Chandigarh Administration and authorities concerned. The court ordered that all remedial measures and suggestions set out in the inquiry report be implemented in letter and spirit. It noted that the one-time financial aid offered to the injured girl for a prosthetic limb had not been accepted by her parents, who wished to explore the possibility of a transplant when she reached the age of majority. Accordingly, the Chandigarh Administration was directed to bear all medical expenses arising from the injuries, including costs for a prosthetic arm or transplantation surgery, whether in India or abroad.

The court also directed Carmel Convent School to waive her school fees for all academic sessions until she completed her senior secondary examination. Additionally, the Education Department was instructed to ensure that every school under its control either allows students to consume meals in classrooms or provides a safe, hygienic, designated dining area for students.