State of Rajasthan vs Vidhyawati
BENCH: SINHA, BHUVNESHWAR P.(CJ) KAPUR, J.L. HIDAYATULLAH, M. SHAH, J.C. MUDHOLKAR, J.R.
FACTS
The first defendant was a temporary employee of the state and worked as a driver on probation. While performing his duty and driving the vehicle back from the workshop after repairs knocked down a person walking on the footpath resulting in his death. The plaintiffs sued the driver as well as the State of Rajasthan.
ISSUES
What is the extent of the vicarious liability of the government for the tortious acts of its employees?
Was this an exercise of sovereign powers of the state?
Whether under Article 300 the State of Rajasthan can be held liable?
LAW INVOLVED
Article 300 of the Indian Constitution
JUDGEMENT
It was held that the State should be as much liable for the tort in respect of a tortious act committed by its servant within the scope of his employment and functioning as such as any other employer. The principle that 'The king can do no wrong' is not good in the country of India. The act done does not fall under acts done in pursuance of sovereign powers and further while expanding on article 300 and comparing it with the Government of India Act, it was concluded that even though
Comments