https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217617 Public law compensation for alleged Article 21 breach required actionable State fault proximate to the harm, marked by mala fides, conscious abuse, or direct negligence; on the record, the Union was not shown to have caused the seafarers' disappearance by any such omission, so compensation against the State was declined. Enhanced compensation was also refused because the material was insufficient to reassess the quantum on age, income, or other relevant factors, and the Court declined to create a compensation formula under Article 142, leaving broader policy and legislative measures to the competent authorities. The deposited compensation was directed for expeditious disbursement. en-us Thu, 18 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217617 Public law compensation for alleged Article 21 breach required actionable State fault proximate to the harm, marked by mala fides, conscious abuse, or direct negligence; on the record, the Union was not shown to have caused the seafarers' disappearance by any such omission, so compensation against the State was declined. Enhanced compensation was also refused because the material was insufficient to reassess the quantum on age, income, or other relevant factors, and the Court declined to create a compensation formula under Article 142, leaving broader policy and legislative measures to the competent authorities. The deposited compensation was directed for expeditious disbursement. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217617