Orissa High Court: In a civil writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking payment of ex-gratia compensation for the injuries sustained by the petitioner due to LPG cylinder blast, SK Panigrahi, JJ. allowed the petition and directed for compensation of Rs. 2,00,000/- be paid to the petitioner.
The Court asked the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas to issue detailed advisories to the public sectors oil companies regarding proper generation of public awareness about the provisions of insurance for the victims of gas burn due to LPG cylinder blast and the importance of safety training to the LPG cylinder handling personnel and to LPG customers.
Factual Matrix
The petitioner is a daily labourer and was working in A’s house. In A’s house there was fire accident on 27-9-2021 due to leakage of gas from the cylinder, which led the fire to spread in the house damaging the property. A and the petitioner were seriously injured and were shifted to hospital for treatment. However, while undergoing treatment, A passed away on 7-10-2021.
As per the conditions of the insurance policy, ex- gratia compensation is to be paid to the victims of the accident, who sustained burn injuries caused due to leakage of gas from the cylinder. The petitioner’s case was that being a victim of gas accident, he is entitled to receive the ex- gratia compensation amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- which is to be paid by the insurance company- ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. The petitioner submitted his application to the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd./ Gas Agency; however, no reply was received from them. The petitioner was informed that his claim was forwarded to the insurance company.
The Court, vide previous order, directed the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar to communicate to the insurance company about the incident along with all the relevant documents.
Decision
Despite clear directives from the Court in its order dated 22-03-2024, the Court noted that the orders were not complied with. The Court said that the lack of any response, clarification, or affidavit from the parties concerned demonstrated a ‘disregard for the judicial process’. The Court also said that the prolonged inaction by the opposite parties, caused unnecessary delays, which not only hinders the administration of justice but also prejudicial to the interests of the party’s awaiting resolution.
The Court said that due to this dire incident, the petitioner not only did suffer severe physical injuries but also endured significant emotional trauma and incurred substantial medical expenses, hence it was fair to grant compensation. Therefore, the Court directed the insurance company to pay ex-gratia compensation Rs. 2,00,000 for the injuries sustained by the petitioner caused due to gas accident within the period of two months.
Insurance Coverage in LPG cylinder explosion
The Court pointed out that the knowledge of insurance coverage, in case of LPG cylinder blasts, are unknown to thousands of customers. The response mechanism in case of any blast is also not delineated properly by the LPG supplying companies. Further, the Court observed that the staff handling the LPG cylinders have little knowledge as to how to safely handle gas cylinders to mitigate the risks of ruptured cylinders, ignition, gas leaks and related human harms. Therefore, the Court said that it is imperative that the staff is trained, to ensure health and safety onsite especially when they are carrying dangerous goods, such as gas bottles and cylinders. The Court also noted that it is very common in urban and semi-urban areas that a staff of the LPG dealer carries four to five cylinders loaded in a bicycle or in a two-wheeler which seems to be hugely unsafe from the point of view of transportation and danger of leakage of the chemical. The Court stated that “applicable safety regulations and the responsibilities of the worker/contactor is of paramount importance. The hazard training like how fires start, ignition sources, asphyxiation hazards, toxic and corrosive gases, how oxidizers create fires and explosions, chemical reactions and incompatible substances are hardly imparted to workers as well as the consumer of the LPG.” The Court also added that the first aid measures, such as the location of first aid equipment and emergency showers, how to treat at the time of emergency, who to notify in the event of an accident etc. are some of the essential elements of training to the LPG handing workers as well as the LPG customers.
Conclusively, the Court said that it is imperative that the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas should issue detailed advisories to the public sectors oil companies regarding proper generation of public awareness about the provisions of insurance for the victims of gas burn due to LPG cylinder blast and the importance of safety training to the LPG cylinder handling personnel and to LPG customers. The training should essentially incorporate the understanding of the dangers of compressed gas cylinders at the end of the LPG handling staff and customers, knowledge of how to properly move, handle and store cylinders, troubleshooting and emergency procedure in case of leak and emergency response in case of blasts. The Court highlighted that many victims of gas leakage mishaps are unaware of the norm that gas companies are liable to compensate them for their loss under the aforementioned scheme. The ignorance about the insurance cover often makes the accident victim or their family members lose the benefit of claim. The Ministry should ensure that the information about the insurance coverage be circulated properly through mass media and the said insurance coverage related information can be printed at the back side of the money receipt issued to the customers.
The Court pointed that the oil marketing companies take comprehensive Insurance Policy under ‘Public Liability Policy for Oil Industries’ to provide relief to the affected persons in case of LPG related accidents. As per the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, the policy provides for:
a. Personal accident cover of Rs. 6,00,000 per person in case of death
b. Covers medical expenses of Rs 30 lakh per event with a maximum of Rs. 2,00,000 per person c. In case of property damage, it covers maximum of Rs. 2,00,000 per event at authorized customer’s registered premises.
[Sushant Behera v. General Manager, ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Ori 2288, decided on: 16-08-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the petitioner: Advocate Bijaya Kumar Nayak
For the respondent: Sr. Advocate Shantanu Kumar Sarangi; Advocate Srinivas Patnaik
Buy Constitution of India HERE
