Sangeeta Vs Haryana Vidut Prasaran Nigam and Ors.

The present application has b e en filed under Section 151 CP C for placing on record the affidavit submitted by sister of applicant/petition e r as Annexure A-1 with exemption from fili n g the certified copy of the same. In view of the grounds mentio n ed in the application, the same i s allowed, a s prayed for, subject to all just exceptions. Annexure A-1 i s ordered to b e taken on record.

¶16

Registry is directed to place th e same at the appropriate place.

¶17

PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.28 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

2

CWP-9033 - 2022

Main

The present petition has been f iled under Article 226/227 of t h e Constitutio n of India praying for issuance o f a writ, order or directions in t h e nature of m andamus directing the respo n dents to grant all the financi a l benefits to the petitioner and her sibling s in accordance with successi o n certificate dated 15.01.2022 (Annexure P-9) and further directing t h e respondent s to release compassionate fina n cial assistance and also payme n t of ex-grati a as laid down in the schemes of the Government. Further prayi n g for directin g the respondents to grant fami l y pension to the petitioner bei n g unwed dep e ndent daughter of deceased Sh. Ram Rattan, an employee of t h e respondent Nigam.

¶22

Learned counsel for the re s pondent(s), at the very outs e t, submits th a t all admissible benefits have a l ready been released in favour o f the petitioner and that the affidavit of resp o ndent No. 2, filed in complian c e with the or d er passed by this Court on 18.07.2024, stands on record. It i s , thus, conte n ded that the grievance raised b y the petitioner in the present ca s e stands redr e ssed, rendering the petition infr u ctuous.

¶23

In rebuttal, learned counsel f o r the petitioner submits that t h e petitioner has indeed received the fi n ancial benefits amounting t o Rs.18,87,1 7 3/3, however, the same have been released only during t h e n pendency o f the present petition and after a n inordinate delay of more th a eight years. The retiral dues of the petit i oner's father were not releas e d

¶24

PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.28 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

3

¶26

CWP-9033 - 2022

¶27

immediatel y upon his death, although th e respondents were obligated t o release the same within two months there o f. It is, therefore, contended th a t the delay i n releasing the retiral dues entitl e s the petitioner to interest on t h e delayed pa y ments in terms of the judgme n t rendered by the Full Bench o f this Court i n A.S. Randhawa, Supdg. Engineer (Retd.) v. State of Punjab, 1998 (1) SCT 343.

¶28

Per contra , learned counsel f o r the respondent(s) submits th a t the retiral d ues have already been paid to the petitioner(s). However, he i s unable to d i spute that there has been an inordinate delay in the release of t h e retiral dues and that the case of the petitioner stands squarely covered by t h e judgment i n A.S. Randhawa (supra).

¶29

Having heard the submissions made by learned counsel for t h e parties and upon perusal of the record with their able assistance, it transpir e s that the fat h er of the petitioner expired o n 08.06.2016, whereas the retir a l dues, as pe r the affidavit dated 28.10.202 4 , have been paid by way of t w o cheques. T h e relevant extract thereof reads as under:3

¶30

<....Thus, the entire a mount in terms of Rule 5 o f Haryana Compassionate As s istance to the dependents o f deceased Govt. Employee Ru l es, 2006 read with Rule 3(d) o f the Family Pension Scheme, 1964 has been disbursed to t h e petitioner. Calculation sheet i n this regard is annexed herewi t h as Annexure R-2/1. True co p y of cheque No.051348 dat e d 09.04.2024 and cheque No . 057807 dated 16.10.2024 a r e annexed herewith Annexure R - 2/2 and R-2/3 respectively....=

¶31

PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.28 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶32

4

¶33

CWP-9033 - 2022

¶34

The respondents were obligated to release all retiral dues with i n two month s of death of father of petitioner. As such, present case is square l y covered by the judgment rendered by a F ull Bench of this Court in A.S . Randhawa (supra) wherein it was opined that disbursement of retiral du e s must be done in a timely manner. Any de l ay over a period of two mont h s qua the sai d disbursement would entitle to c laim interest on the amount due.

¶35

In view of the above, the p resent petition is disposed of . Responden t s are directed to release the amount of interest on delay e d payment t o the petitioner at the rate o f 6% per annum in lieu of a ll admissible r etiral dues . The same shall be c alculated from two months aft e r the death of father of petitioner ti l l its actual realization. T h e respondent ( s)/competent authority is directed to do the needful within 0 3 months of r eceipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶36

Pending miscellaneous appl i cation(s), if any, also stan d s disposed o f .

¶37

(HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE

¶38

November 18, 2025 P.C

¶39

Whether speaking/reaso n ed. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No

¶40

PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.28 16:33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Sangeeta v. Haryana Vidut Prasaran Nigam and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangeeta v. Haryana Vidut Prasaran Nigam and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Subhash Chander Gupta Vs State of Haryana and Others

Gurcharan Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Bhoop Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Ram Kanwar Dangi Vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and Another

Deep Chand Vs Uttar Haryana Bill Vitran Nigam and Ors.

Raman Lal and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others