2013-06-20 : Update on Compensation for Ram Sharan’s Family

As you may recall Ram Sharan, who hailed from Katihar Bihar, died at work on 21st November, 2013 due to a fall from the then under construction new RA building. His widow Samtuliya (who was pregnant at the time of the accident) and her children (approx. four and two years at the time of death of their father) made two trips to the city immediately after the death to get their legal compensation but were unable to do so. Meanwhile Samtuliya, delivered a baby around two months back. On 16th June Samtuliya and her three children arrived yet once again to Kanpur (amidst incessant rains) to get her legal dues but had to go back to her village within 24 hours without achieving the purpose. The following is briefly what transpired:

• On 16th June (Sunday) in the evening at around 5.30 pm HM got a phone call from Samtuliya’s brother Virendra that he along with Samtuliya and her three children and a representative of petty contractor had come to Kanpur because M/s Ramki (the main contactor of the building from which Ram Sharan fell) had asked the family to come over to appear at the court on Mon 17th morning for the settlement of compensation. But after arriving here when they contacted the contractor’s (Ramki) man for accommodation he flatly refused to extend any help in this regard. He actually asked them to go back to the railway station and appear only on Monday in time for the court and then switched off his mobile . Not knowing what to do the party came to the place where they were earlier put up, just outside the IITK Bara Sirohi gate[1]. But they were not allowed to enter the premises and were informed that the place was no longer rented out for the purpose which it was used earlier and this is when they had called up HM. 

• Meanwhile monsoon has hit the city two weeks early and the group (including a two month old infant and two toddlers) which would have travelled 1000 kms (most likely unreserved) was stranded in the rains nowhere to go. Not knowing what else to do and yet convinced that the Institute had a moral obligation to take care of her stay we decided to call up a faculty colleague for help. He in turn contacted a top level institute official and was assured that the Institute would take care.

• By the time HM could get back to Samtuliya, they had already left the place and were halfway to Kalyanpur station. At around 7 pm HM representatives went to assess the situation. They found the family waiting outside the gate of aforementioned property right on the road completely drenched. While we were talking to the group two individuals claiming to be contractor’s men came over. They said that they have been instructed by their contractor to take care of the family. Though they assured that they would take care of sustenance and stay of Samtuliya and her children their attitude suggested that this was done as an unwarranted favour. The family was then taken inside the premises.

At the Court

Since it was the contractor’s responsibility to interface with the labour officials and ensure the payment of the compensation, HM was not present in the court but had told the family to get in touch with us with details of what transpired. When we did not hear from them till late in the evening, we contacted Samtuliya’s brother and came to know that the whole group had already reached the railway station to go back to their village and that they had not got anything towards the compensation.  Further the infant apparently was doing rather poorly and though they had asked for some money towards travel and sustenance from the contractor they were flatly refused.  We later reconstructed what happened at the court through several phone calls to the petty contractor and the associate who had accompanied family to Kanpur which is as follows:

• On 17th June the family was taken to the labour court by the contractor. Samtuliya with the help of her associates had submitted all the requisite documents for claiming the compensation (marriage proof, succession certificate, no objection certificate, etc.) to the labour court several months back. But when the officials in the court discovered that Samtuliya had had another child they demanded a succession certificate for her too as she too was an equal claimant to the compensation.

• Apparently the family could get the certificate from the local court itself, but by the time they got the document made they were informed that the concerned official had left and would come back only next week, hence nothing could be done till then.

• At that point apparently the official of the court who had been interfacing with the family and the contractor’s representative, whispered in the ears of the contractor’s man something to the effect that the family would have to give Rs 40,000/- in cash to be able to get their compensation. The contractor’s men did some negotiations and brought the amount down to Rs 20000/-. The family was then asked to go back, arrange the money and appear in the court on 26th June, 2013.

Some important Issues which emerge:

The whole episode had a sense of déjà vu for us. When Samtuliya made her earlier two trips immediately after her husband’s death it was the peak of winter. She (she was pregnant then) and the two small children were left to fend for themselves without any support towards her stay, clothing, food and travel. She had to leave because of inadequate documents – neither the contractor nor the Institute deemed it appropriate to tell her and her associates about the exact requirements before she made such long and arduous journeys. When these major lapses were pointed out to the Institute, those at the highest level claimed that they were unaware of the circumstances but that such a state of affairs was unacceptable and the Institute would ensure that such a deplorable situation does not recur in future. Such an unequivocal commitment was reassuring and yet we were apprehensive, and apparently not unfoundedly. Samtuliya and her children have already travelled 6000 kms (each journey involves 2000 kms rail distance), under extreme weather conditions, facing tremendous indignity and uncertainty each time, but are yet to get anything towards their legal compensation. The issues that face us are:

• The Institute is in a state of convenient denial – a stance which seems natural for this system when it comes to the rights and dignity of contract workers. And this denial starts from the very identity/existence of the workers. Even after being proven irrevocably that late Ram Sharan was from Katihar, Bihar (he along with his 45 co-workers) the Institute has denied officially the existence of any migrant worker in the Institute.

• Late Ram Sharan died working for the Institute in what even the official enquiry committee deemed as a lapse of adequate safety measure. This irreparable loss can never be made up but the Institute could have partly redeemed itself by extending the minimum courtesy of providing dignified hospitality and interface with labour office to the bereaved family which includes infant and toddlers.

• But on the contrary, ironically the facility which was available to Samtuliya as a matter of course during her last visit (in December 2012), even that was doled out as a privilege this time. The Institute’s ‘taking care of the issue’ involved merely ‘allowing’ them to stay in the same damp quarters for a night as a favour.

• Samtuliya and her children may again have to make the 1000 km journey in 10 days and then yet again we do not know how many times over – there are so many factors not in her hands. The presence of court officials, maybe some further documents, not handing over satisfactory ‘service charges’ to the labour official, or maybe something else which we have not yet foreseen so far. The Institute would feign ignorance about all this and hence absolve itself of any responsibility.

It is up to us as a community and our collective conscience to decide whether we need to intervene in this matter.

Hamara Manch

June 20, 2013

[1] The place was basically an unfinished building where migrant workers were regularly put up in batches of 40-50 individuals. And since at the time of Ram Sharan’s death he and his fellow workers from the same village were lodging there, Samtuliya and her children were also accommodated there. The place has very minimal amenities - a basic toilet, a hand pump, the entire ground floor which does not even have concrete flooring, is let out to the workers essentially for spending the night.

Attachments: samtuliya update.pdf