Tardy Progress in Sigachi Fire Accident: Telangana HC Entertains PIL
The panel speaking through Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh questioned the government on several fronts, as to whether any arrests was made. When the government replied in the negative, the court remarked on the gravity of the loss and the need for accountability.
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Thursday directed the government to respond in a public interest litigation (PIL) alleging tardy investigation and lack of safety regulations in the Sigachi Industries Ltd plant at Patancheru which allegedly led to a fire accident on June 30. The PIL challenged delay in payment of compensation to families of affected workers in the fire.
A panel comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin was hearing a PIL filed by retired scientist K. Babu Rao. Vasudha Nagaraj, counsel for the petitioner, pointed out that not all the workers were in permanent service or drawn from Hyderabad and that they were mostly migrant workers employed on contract. She argued that compensation should be paid to all the workers and that the government should enforce it.
The petitioner contended that the absence of safety audits, failure to recognise combustible dust hazards, and misrepresentation in the company’s safety datasheet were directly responsible for the explosion. It was alleged that neither factory inspectors nor pollution control authorities flagged the clear and present danger posed by the facility resulting in systemic regulatory failure.
The panel speaking through Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh questioned the government on several fronts, as to whether any arrests was made. When the government replied in the negative, the court remarked on the gravity of the loss and the need for accountability.
The court directed the government to file a comprehensive counter affidavit disclosing the exact number and category of workers including permanent, casual, and daily-wage workers present on the day of the explosion, and the statutes under which Sigachi Industries may be held liable and the status of compensation paid. The panel observed that the matter must not be treated as adversarial litigation and that the role of government was to stand with the families of the deceased and injured.
Counsel representing the government contended that they were awaiting reports of the high-level committee and expert committee on the matter, to which the Chief Justice questioned whether investigation would depend on the outcomes of these two committees. The additional advocate-general, along with government pleaders for the home and labour departments, and the Pollution Control Board, sought four weeks to respond, The court granted three weeks, stressing the urgency of the matter, and posted the PIL for hearing on August 27.