Chandigarh, April 7 -- The Punjab and Haryana high court has declined to interfere with a district court order in which compensation awarded to an electrocution victim from Pathankot was reduced from Rs 20 lakh to 10 lakh. "It is my view that it is about time that entire blame and burden cannot be cast upon the state authorities; and citizens themselves are also called upon to be alert and vigilant in regard to their duties. It cannot be that we as citizens continue to be foolhardy and then expect the State to bear the burden of our foolishness. In view of the above, no ground is made out for enhancement of compensation," the bench of justice Nidhi Gupta observed while dismissing an appeal from a Punjab resident. As per plea, the victim, Sahil, then a 5-year-old was flying kite on the roof of the house owned by his grandfather on December 15, 2000, and somehow came in contact with a 33 KV high tension wire which had been installed by the then Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB) and now Punjab State Power Corporation Limited - running through the street. In order to save his life, doctors had amputated his left arm, right hand, right and left leg. Initially, the family approached the PSEB for compensation and later a court in Pathankot in 2004. In 2008, additional civil judge (senior division), Pathankot, awarded a compensation of Rs 20 lakh. However, on an appeal by the respondents, the additional district judge, Gurdaspur reduced it to Rs 10 lakh. It was against this order, the victim had approached the high court seeking increase in compensation. The PSEB had stated that high tension wire had been initially installed by the BBMB in the year 1957-1958. Thereafter, in 1997, line had been transferred to the PSEB for maintenance. The PSEB had argued that under Rule 82 of the Indian Electricity Rules, no construction is to be allowed under high voltage line without permission of the electricity department. Despite that appellant's grandfather had raised construction below high voltage line. No such permission was sought by him either from the electricity department or from the municipal corporation. "Therefore, at best, it is a case of contributory negligence. Accident had not occurred due to any fault on the part of the respondents but was due to carelessness of the appellant and his family," the PSEB had said, adding that respondents have already paid Rs 16 lakh to the appellant in the year 2014. The court took note of the rules that prior to undertaking any construction under a high voltage wire which is already installed, necessary notice has to be given to the supplier. "Such permissions are necessary to ensure safety of the property and protection of the persons intending to raise the construction," it noted adding that victim family has admitted to not taking any permission as mandated in rules. "It is my view, that in this situation, as negligence is also on part of the plaintiff (victim) side, appellant cannot seek enhancement of compensation," the court observed. "There can be no manner of any doubt about the fact that this court has utmost sympathy with the appellant. However, it is also to be appreciated that, due care and caution was required to have been exercised by the appellant and his family. .Thus, the appellant has been permitted by his family to expose himself to danger of electrocution. It would, therefore, appear that there is negligence on the part of the plaintiff side as well," the court said dismissing the appeal....