Professional Documents
Culture Documents
(From the impugned judgment and order dated 30.11.2009 passed by the High
Court of Madhya Pradesh in Writ Petition No .11276/2009.)
VERSUS
PAPER BOOK
WITH
9. Nature of urgency:
10. In case it is a Tax matter:-
a) Tax amount involved in the matter NA
b) Whether a reference/statement of the
case was called for or rejected NA
c) Whether similar tax matters of same parties
filed earlier (may be for earlier/other
Assessment year)? NA
d) Exemption Notification/Circular No NA
19. If it is a fresh matter, please state the name of the High Court
and the Coram in the impugned Judgment / Order
High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat at
Jabalpur order dated 30.11.2009. CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.
Dipak Misra, J. & Mr. R.K. Gupta, J.
20. If the matter was already listed in this Court
a) When was it listed? NA
b) What was the coram? NA
c) What was the direction of the Court NA
Date: ___/__/2010
ANITHA SHENOY
Advocate for Petitioners
SYNOPSIS
March, 1989 The Settlement was challenged by the Bhopal Gas Peedith
Mahila Udyog Sanghathan (BGPMUS), the Bhopal
Gas Peedith Sangharsh Sahayog Samiti (BGPSSS)
and others vide Review Petition No. 229 of 1989 in
Civil Appeals Nos. 3187-88 of 1988 and vide Writ
Petition (Civil) No. 293 of 1989 before this Hon’ble
Court, mainly on three grounds: (a) that the
Settlement sum was less than one-sixth of the claim
originally made by the Union of India before the
Bhopal District Court in January, 1986; (b) that the
Settlement did not disclose the number of
beneficiaries (c) that the Settlement quashed all
pending and future criminal cases against all the
accused in the case.
03.10.1991 The Supreme Court dismissed the review and writ petitions
filed against the Settlement as far as the civil liability
of UCC was concerned in its order reported in (1991)
4 SCC 584. However, it revoked the quashing of
criminal cases. On the issue of future claims this
Hon’ble Court held that,
“(1991) 4 SCC 584: Para 135
The likelihood of future complications – though they
may mean mere assessment or evaluation of mere
chances – are also put into the scales in quantifying
damages. This principle may, as rightly pointed out by
Sri Nariman, take care of the victims who have
manifested symptoms. But what about those who are
presently wholly asymptomatic and have no material
to support a present claim? Who will provide them
surveillance costs and if at some day in the future
they develop any dreaded symptoms, who will provide
them with compensation? Even if the award is an
“once and for all” determination, these aspects must
be taken into account.”
14.09.2004 Since the Supreme Court had ipso facto recognized that the
magnitude of the Bhopal disaster was FIVE times
greater than was assumed at the time of the
Settlement, the Bhopal Gas Peedith Mahila Udyog
Sanghathan (hereinafter referred to as ‘BGPMUS’) &
the Bhopal Gas Peedith Sangharsh Sahayog Samit
(hereinafter referred to as ‘BGPSSS’) filed I.A.Nos.
48-49 of 2004 in Civil Appeals Nos. 3187-3186 of
1988 in the Supreme Court.
28.10.2009 The Petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 11276 of 2009 before
the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur
against the order dated 31.01.09 of the learned
Welfare Commissioner. A true copy of the Writ Petition
No. 11276 of 2009 is hereto marked and annexed as
ANNEXURE – P6.
Versus
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipak Misra
Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.K. Gupta
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORDER
(30.11.2009)
(From the impugned judgment and order dated 30.11.2009 passed by the High
Court of Madhya Pradesh in Writ Petition No .11276/2009.)
BETWEEN
POSITION OF THE PARTIES
VERSUS
OFFICE OF THE WELFARE Respondent Contesting
COMMISSIONER, No. 1 Respond
Through the Assistant Welfare ent No. 1
Commissioner,
Dr. Rajendra Prasad Bhavan,
Opposite Old Vidhan Sabha,
Bhopal, M.P.
TO
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND HIS
COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT
OF INDIA:
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITONER
ABOVE NAMED
1. This Special Leave Petition is filed against the order and the
judgment dated 30.11.2009 of a Division Bench of Hon’ble
High Court of Madhya Pradesh, principal seat at Jabalpur in
Writ Petition No. 11276 of 2009.
2. QUESTION OF LAW:
That the present Petition involves substantial questions of
law of general importance inter alia including the following
question:
5. GROUNDS:
The Petitioners prefer this petition under Article 136 of the
Constitution of India for Special Leave to appeal inter alia on
the following grounds:
5.1 Because the settlement was based on the
circumstances which this Hon’ble Court took into
consideration to arrive at the finding that it was a just
settlement. This Hon’ble Court however, had put a word
of caution that the entire aim behind the exercise is that
there should not be miscarriage of justice and violation
of legal and constitutional rights of the persons affected
and that if such an eventuality arises, this Hon’ble Court
will review its findings and will endeavour to undo any
such injustice (vide Union Carbide Corporation Vs
Union of India (1989) 3 SCC 38).
7. MAIN PRAYER :
It is therefore, most respectfully, prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to:-
IN THE MATTER OF :-
VERSUS
CERTIFICATE
Certified that the Special Leave Petition is confined only to the pleadings
before the Court whose order is challenged and the other documents
relied upon in those documents. No additional facts, documents or
grounds have been taken or relied upon in this Special Leave Petition. It
is further certified that the copies of the documents / annexures attached
to the Special Leave Petition are necessary to answer the question of
law raised in the petition or to make the grounds urged in the Special
Leave Petition for consideration of this Hon’ble Court. This certificate is
given on the basis of the instructions given by the petitioners / person
authorized by the petitioners whose affidavit is filed in support of the
Special Leave Petition.
Filed By:
New Delhi
Dated: ___.03.2010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _____ OF 2010
(UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)
IN THE MATTER OF :-
I, Abdul Jabbar Khan, S/o Late Shri Abdul Sattar, aged about 52
years, residing at 51, Rajendra Nagar, Bhopal – 462010 do hereby
affirm and state as follows:
1. I am the Petitioner No. 1 and the Convenor of Bhopal Gas
Peedith Mahila Udyog Sangathan (BGPMUS) in the above
Special Leave Petition. I am aware of the facts and as such I
am competent to swear this affidavit.
2. I state that the contents of the Special Leave Petition to
appeal in paragraphs 1 to 8 at pages to are true to my
information received from the records and legal advice
received and believed by me to be correct. I say that the
facts contained in the form of List of Dates at pages to are
true and correct. I say that the contents of the other IAs
are true and correct.
3. That the Annexures P1 to at pages to are true and
correct copies of the respective originals.
4. I say that the facts stated in this Affidavit are true and correct,
no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed
therefrom.
Verified at New Delhi on 16th day of February, 2010.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
Verified at New Delhi on this __ day of February, 2009 that the contents
of the above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and that
nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A. No. ______ of 2010
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _______ OF 2010
(UNDER ARTICLE 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)
VERSUS
TO
THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS LORDSHIPS COMPANION JUSTICES
OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.
3. That the Petitioners could not file this Special Leave Petition
earlier as they have been collecting information about death
claim cases rejected in the court of Welfare Commissioner
and also by the High Court. In addition to this, the Petitioners
have also been pursuing other cases pending in various
courts including this Hon’ble Court pertaining to the Bhopal
Gas Tragedy including the criminal case ongoing in Bhopal.
These have been consuming a lot of time, in particular the
ongoing case before this Hon’ble Court wherein the Welfare
Commissioner has moved an application seeking directions
to close down the Office of the Welfare Commissioner.
Filed By: