The Telangana High Court has taken a firm stance on the tragic incident at Sigachi Pharma, demanding clear explanations regarding the compensation provided to the families of workers impacted by the devastating explosion on June 30, 2025. In a significant development, the court has issued directives to both the pharmaceutical company and the state government to address apparent inconsistencies in the payment process.
Court Directs Sigachi Pharma to Clarify Compensation Discrepancies
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin has formally called upon Sigachi Pharma to provide a detailed account of the compensation disbursed to the families of workers who lost their lives, went missing and were later declared dead, or sustained injuries in the catastrophic blast. The bench emphasized the need for transparency and accountability in this matter, highlighting the importance of ensuring that the affected families receive the support they are entitled to.
State Government Asked to Submit Compensation Details
In addition to questioning Sigachi Pharma, the court has instructed the Telangana state government to present comprehensive details regarding the compensation that has been disbursed to the families of the victims. This dual approach underscores the court's commitment to examining all aspects of the compensation process, ensuring that both corporate and governmental responsibilities are thoroughly scrutinized.
The court further directed the legal services authority to extend necessary legal assistance to the workers' families, recognizing the potential challenges they may face in navigating the legal and administrative procedures involved in securing compensation.
Background of the Tragic Incident
The explosion at Sigachi Pharma resulted in the immediate loss of at least 46 workers, including the company's vice-president. Additionally, eight individuals who were reported missing in the aftermath were later declared dead, bringing the total number of fatalities to 54. This tragic event has left a profound impact on the community and raised serious questions about safety protocols and post-incident support.
Public Interest Litigation Highlights Payment Inconsistencies
The court's directives were issued during the hearing of a public interest litigation (PIL), which was initiated after amicus curiae Dominic Fernandes brought to light significant discrepancies between the ex-gratia amounts initially announced by Sigachi Pharma and the Telangana state government, and the actual compensation paid to the families. Fernandes pointed out that while Sigachi had publicly committed to paying Rs 1 crore as ex-gratia to each deceased worker's family shortly after the blast, the company later retracted this commitment, shifting the responsibility for the remaining amount to the state government.
However, it appears that the state government has also not fulfilled its obligation to pay the balance ex-gratia, creating a situation where the families have received only a fraction of the promised support. According to the amicus curiae, only Rs 42 lakh has been paid to the families of deceased workers, with merely Rs 25 lakh constituting the ex-gratia component, while the remainder comprises statutory benefits. Fernandes also noted inconsistencies in the payment details, further complicating the matter.
Legal Proceedings and Government Response
The state government informed the court that a chargesheet has been filed in connection with the blast case, and a final report was submitted regarding the missing workers after they were declared dead. The government also provided details of the compensation that has been paid to the affected families, but the court's intervention suggests that these measures may not be sufficient to address the concerns raised.
Court Expands Scope of PIL and Adjourns Hearing
In a move to ensure a comprehensive examination of the issue, the bench directed the regional commissioner of the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation in Hyderabad, the regional director of the Employees' State Insurance in Hyderabad, and the Controller of Drugs for the Telangana government to be impleaded as parties in the PIL. These entities have been asked to file counter-affidavits explaining their stand on the matter, thereby broadening the scope of the legal inquiry.
The court has dispensed with the personal appearance of investigating officers and other officials, streamlining the proceedings while maintaining focus on the substantive issues. The matter has been adjourned to March 12 for further hearing, allowing time for the involved parties to prepare their responses and for the court to continue its oversight of this critical case.
This ongoing legal battle highlights the broader issues of corporate accountability, governmental responsibility, and the need for robust mechanisms to support victims of industrial accidents. The Telangana High Court's proactive stance serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in safeguarding the rights of affected individuals and ensuring that justice is served in the aftermath of such tragedies.
