Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court directed the state government to make efforts to assist the families of workers who died in the accident at the Sigachi Industry.
The court, comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Mohinuddin, adjourned the hearing to August 27, directing the government to file a comprehensive counter-affidavit addressing the issues raised by the petitioner.
The bench also cautioned against any attempts to downplay the severity of the accident as time passes.
The directives came during the hearing of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by retired scientist K Babu Rao, concerning the fire accident at Sigachi Industry, alleged lack of safety standards at the factory, and delayed compensation to the victim families.
Most of the workers were migrant labourers: Petitioner’s counsel
The petitioner’s counsel informed the court that most of the workers were migrant labourers employed on a contract basis.
They pleaded with the court to direct the state government to ensure compensation for the families of the deceased and injured workers.
During the proceedings, Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh inquired about the FIR registered regarding the accident and the progress of the investigation. When asked if anyone had been arrested so far, the government counsel replied in the negative.
Court seeks details of workers
Observing the gravity of the accident, the court sought details on the number of workers present in the factory on the day of the incident, categorising them into permanent, regular, and daily wage workers. It also ordered the government to disclose the details of compensation already paid to the workers in its counter-affidavit.
The government counsel stated that they were awaiting reports from a high-level committee and an expert committee regarding the accident. Chief Justice Singh questioned whether the investigation into the accident would depend on these two committee reports, to which the counsel replied no.
Chief Justice Singh emphasised that the state government should not treat this case as an adversarial litigation. While the Additional Advocate General sought four weeks to file the counter, stating that the state government would address all the petitioner’s requests, the bench granted three weeks, deeming it sufficient.
