Allowed

Sugan Prajapat v. Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Rajasthan HC13 Feb 2024CW/7194/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition seeking ex gratia compensation for the widow of an employee who died of Covid-19 during lockdown while ensuring electricity supply to care centers. The court quashed the rejection order and directed payment of Rs. 70 Lakhs (Rs. 20 Lakhs statutory + Rs. 50 Lakhs special), with interest.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the impugned order dated 18.01.2021 and directed respondents to pay Rs. 70,00,000/- as ex gratia with 9% interest per annum if not paid within three months.

Sugan Prajapat Vs Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7194/2022

¶4

Sugan Prajapat W/o Late Shri Megha Ram Prajapat, Aged About 54 Years, Resident Of 65, Digvijay Nagar, Pal Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, Pin-Code-342003.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Through Its Managing Director, New Power House Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.

¶8

The Secretary (Administration), Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited, New Power House Road, Jodhpur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Rajat Arora
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Dinesh Kumar Joshi

¶11

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶12

Judgment

¶13

Reportable

¶14

Reserved on 29/01/2024 Pronounced on 13/02/2024

¶15

This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the

¶16

Constitution of India claiming the following reliefs:

¶17

“It is therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that the writ petition may kindly be allowed and by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction:-

¶18

i. The order dated 18.01.2021 (Annexure-16) may kindly be quashed and set aside. ii. The respondents may be directed to release the Ex Gratia amount of 70 Lac Rs. Iii. The interest be awarded in favour of the petitioner @ 10% p.a. from the date when the claim was arbitrarily rejection by the respondents i.e. from 18.01.2021.

(2 of 10)

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

[CW-7194/2022]

iv. That the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to impose substantial cost on the respondents in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶23

As per the pleaded facts, the petitioner is a widow whose husband, Late Shri Megha Ram Prajapat ( hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased’ ) was working on the post of Executive Engineer in Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (JdVVNL), Balotra. After lock down took place due to Covid 19 pandemic, the Superintendent Engineer (Pavas) Jodhpur Discom, Barmer vide order dated 10.04.2020 directed the deceased to ensure continuous supply of essential service of electricity to Covid Care Centres/Quarantine Centres.

¶24

2.1. Thereafter, the Finance Department, Government of Rajasthan vide order dated 27.04.2020 decided to grant Rs.50 Lakhs ex gratia amount to the dependents/family of the employees of Autonomous Bodies/Boards/Corporations who lost their lives while working on duty due to Covid 19 Virus, and the Head of the aforesaid bodies were to sanction the said amount on recommendation of the Controlling Officer; furthermore, vide order dated 05.06.2020, the respondent-Managing Director, JdVVNL accorded its approval to adopt the earlier orders issued by Finance Department relating to grant of Rs.50 Lakhs and in accordance with the same inserted regulation 2 (i) below the Regulation 29-A (2) in the JdVVNL Pension Regulations, 1988 wherein the above-said amount was to be granted subject to fulfilment of all conditions of Regulation of 29-A of JdVVNL Pension Regulations, 1988 and the said amount was to be in addition to ex

(3 of 10)

[CW-7194/2022]

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

gratia amount of Rs.20 Lakhs payable under the aforesaid Regulations.

¶29

2.2. Subsequently, on 04.09.2020, the deceased felt sick and tested positive for Covid 19 Virus whereafter unfortunately he soon lost his life due to multi organ failure on 12.09.2020. Thereafter, in view of the order dated 05.06.2020, the petitioner submitted an application alongwith Form-17 seeking grant of ex gratia amount of Rs. 50 Lakhs with an amount of Rs.20 lakhs (as per the Pension Regulations), whereafter the respondent No.2 addressed a communication dated 05.11.2020 to the Zonal Chief Engineer (Barmer Zone) seeking a detailed report, in regard to entitlement of the petitioner to receive the ex gratia amount. In pursuance of the same, the Zonal Chief Engineer (Barmer Zone) wrote a letter to the Superintending Engineer (Pavas), Jodhpur Discom, Jodhpur seeking a comprehensive and detailed report in the matter in question. However, despite the above, vide order dated 18.01.2021, the respondent No.2 refused to accord the above-said benefits to the petitioner.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even though the State Government, as per the aforesaid order, declared compensation of Rs. 50 Lakhs and thereafter the respondents had under the directions of the State Government vide order dated 05.06.2020 introduced the scheme for payment of ex gratia amount of Rs.50 Lakhs by way of amendment in the Regulations, the same being in addition to the Rs. 20 Lakhs under the aforesaid Regulation, however no amount was released in favour of the petitioner.

(4 of 10)

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

[CW-7194/2022]

3.1. It was further submitted that vide the impugned order, the entire claim of Rs. 70 Lakhs was rejected with the reason that it was not established that the deceased expired due to Covid 19 Virus while fighting against the same on duty.

¶35

3.2. It was also submitted that the record clearly reveals that as per the directions of the respondent authorities issued vide order dated 10.04.2020, the deceased was discharging his duties by making frequent visits to the Covid Care Centres to ensure continuous and uninterrupted supply of electricity to such Centres (as evident from the logbook of the vehicle), and on count of such visits and during the course thereof, the deceased, at the relevant time, started feeling sick, due to which he underwent the RTPC Test and tested positive for Covid 19; resultantly, unfortunately, on 12.09.2020, he succumbed to Covid 19 effects i.e. multi organ failure and the same is evident from the report as drawn by the AIIMS Hospital.

¶36

3.3. Learned counsel, in support of his submissions, placed reliance on the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gaurav Kumar Bansal v. Union of India & Ors. (W.P. (C) No. 4539 of 2021 on 24.03.2022 and the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Susheela v. The Union of India & Ors. (S.B.C.W.P. No. 6106/2022 , decided on 29.09.2023) and the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Sangeeta Wahi v. Union of India & Ors. (W.P. (C) 4912/2021 , decided on 18.10.2023), and the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Smt.

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

[CW-7194/2022]

(5 of 10)

Premlata Pandey Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. (Writ -C

¶41

No.17575/2023 , decided on 29.05.2023) .

¶42

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents, while opposing the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the deceased was not discharging any special duties during Covid-19 pandemic and that he was discharging his general duties at the Office and thus the respondent department rightly rejected the grant of aforesaid compensation vide the impugned order.

¶43

4.1. It was further submitted that the petitioner was entitled to get only the ex gratia amount of Rs.20 Lakhs as per the aforesaid Regulation, since the deceased was never directed to visit the Covid Care Centre physically, but was simply directed to coordinate with the nodal officers or in charge of the centre regarding supply of the electricity only, thus it was within the right of the respondent department to reject the application of the petitioner. In this regard, learned counsel referred to para 14 of the reply, in which it has been averred that, “ . . . . .and therefore petitioner was only entitled to get Rs.20 lacs as per Rules . . . . . ”. 4.2. It was also submitted that the letter dated 10.04.2020 was not circulated at concerning offices at any time during the period deceased was working in Balotra as per record of the concerned offices, and therefore, the aforesaid letter was not issued to any offices and the authenticity of the same is not genuine.

¶44

Heard learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record of the case alongwith the judgments cited at the bar.

(6 of 10)

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

[CW-7194/2022]

This Court observes that the petitioner was working on the aforesaid post in JdVVNL, Balotra and during the period of lock down was tasked with maintaining coordination with concerned nodal officers to ensure continuous supply of electricity to the Covid Care Centres; on 27.04.2020, the Finance Department of Rajasthan decided to grant ex gratia amount of Rs. 50 Lakhs to the dependents/family of employees who died due to Covid 19 Virus while fighting against Covid, whereafter the Managing Director of JdVVNL gave approval to adopt the said orders dated 27.04.2020 and 11.04.2020 and to provide the amount of Rs.50 Lakhs in addition to amount of Rs.20 Lakhs to be provided as per the aforesaid Regulation; subsequently, the deceased felt sick and eventually tested positive for Covid 19, whereafter on 12.09.2020 he finally lost his life due to multi organ failure; an application was submitted by the petitioner for grant of aforesaid benefit of Rs. 70 Lakhs, but the same was rejected by respondent no.2 vide the impugned order.

¶49

This Court further observes that vide order No. F12(3)FD/Rules/2014 dated 27.04.2020, the Finance Department of Rajasthan had in continuation to the FD order No. F12(3) FD/Rules/2014 dated 11.04.2020 granted ex gratia amount of Rs.50 Lakhs to dependents/family of employees who died due to infection from Corona, while on duty for fight against Covid-19; the relevant portion whereof is reproduced as hereunder:

¶50

“The Head of such Autonomous Bodies/Boards/Corporations shall sanction the ex-gratia on recommendation of the controlling officer on being

(7 of 10)

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

[CW-7194/2022]

established that the employee has died due to infection from Corona, while on duty for fight against Covid-19.

¶55

Ex-gratia shall be granted from their own funds by such Autonomous Bodies/Boards/Corporations.”

¶56

This Court also observes that the respondent department (JdVVNL) itself approved adoption of the orders dated 27.04.2020 and 11.04.2020, and accordingly, vide order dated 05.06.2020 inserted sub-regulation (2) (i) below the existing Regulation of 29A (2) in the JdVVNL Pension Regulations, 1988 of the Nigam; the relevant portion whereof is reproduced as hereunder:

¶57

“Accordingly, sub-regulation (2) (I) shall be inserted below existing regulation 29-A (2) in the JdVVNL Pension Regulations, 1988 of the Nigam as follows, namely:“(2) (i) The dependents/family of the employees of the Nigam who die due to infection from Corona, while on duty for fight against Covid-19, shall be granted ex-gratia of Rs.50.00 Lakhs, subject to filfillment of all conditions of Regulation 29-A of the JdVVNL Pension Regulations, 1988. The Managing Director, JdVVNL will sanction the ex-gratia on being established that the employee has died due to infection from Corona, while on duty for fight against Covid19.

¶58

This ex-gratia of Rs.50.00 Lakhs shall be in addition to Exgratia of Rs.20.00 Lakhs payable under Regulation 29-A of JdVVNL Pension Regulations, 1988.

¶59

This amount shall not be allowed to those employees who are included in the Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Package: Insurance Scheme for Health Workers fighting Covid-19 declared by the Central Government.”

¶60

This Court further observes that the Chief Engineer vide letter dated 04.03.2021 (Annexure-17) himself admitted that the petitioner had established the fact that the death of the deceased

(8 of 10)

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

[CW-7194/2022]

was in fact occurred due to Covid 19 Virus and he had been infected while discharging his duty for fight against the Corona Virus, and for the same, the petitioner had submitted a certified copy of the log book of vehicle number RJ-19-U-1063 with signature of the deceased dated 26.08.2020 to showcase that the deceased had visited the Covid Centre established by the District Administration at Sivanchi Malani Terapanth Sansthan, Balotra for restoration of power supply; the relevant portion of the said letter dated 04.03.2021 is reproduced as hereunder:

¶65

“1- mijksDr fo”k;kUrxZr Jherh lqxu iztkir /keZifRu Lo- Jh es?kkjke iztkir] iwoZ vf/k’kk”kh vfHk;Urk us bl dk;kZy; esa izkFkZuk i= izLrqr dj voxr djk;k gS fd muds ifr Lo- Jh e?kkjkes iztkir fnukd 26-08-2020 dka ekthokyk 11 ds oh QhMj ls fo|qrs vkiwfr izkZ Ir dju okys floks Uph ekykuh rjkis Fk la LFkku] ckyka rjk es sa ftyk iz'kklu }kjk LFkkfir dkfoM ls sUVj e lksa ;dky 6-15 la 7-35s cts rd ckf/kr jgh fo|qr vkiwfrZ dks iqu% cgky djus ds fy, dkfoM ls sUVj e x, Fksa sA mDr rF; ds izek.k esa fnukad 26-08-2020 dks e`rd vf/kdkjh ds gLrk{kj ls okgu la[;k RJ-19-U-1063 dh ykWx cqd ist la[;k 73 dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi izLrqr dh xbZ gSA bl fnu dks lEcaf/kr lgk;d vfHk;Urk ¼xzkeh.k½ tksfofofufy]ckyksrjk }kjk fy, x, 'kV &Mkmu dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi Hkh layXu dh xbZ gSA

¶66

mijksDr vk/kkj ij erd vf/kdkjh dh vkfJrk us Jh es?kkjke iztkir dh dksfoM&19 M;wVh ij jgrs gq, ladzfer gksdj eR;q gksus lEcU/kh nLrkost@lk{; izLrqr dj ;g LFkkfir fd;k gS fd mudh e`R;q Fight against Covid-19 ls lEcaf/kr dk;Z djrs gq, dksjksuk ls ladzfer gksus ls jkT; ljdkj ,oa fuxe ds vkns'k dzekad 59@206@ fnukad 05-06-2020 ds vuqlkj ns; ifjykHk dh ekax dh xbz gSA

¶67

pwafd Lo- Jh es?kkjke iztkir vf/k’kk”kh vfHk;ark ds inh; drZO;kksa ds fuoZgu dj jgs Fks rFkk blds vuq:i mUg vDlj mPpsa inLFkr fuxe vf/kdkfj;ksa o ftyk iz'kklu ds vf/kdkfj;ksa ds

(9 of 10)

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

[CW-7194/2022]

ekf[kd funS ’kksZ dh ikyuk gsa rq QhYM es Hkzesa .k dj fo|qr vkiwfr dhZ ekfuVfjW x dk dk;a djuk gkZ rk FkkAftlls dks foM ls s.Vj d Hkzes .k ds nkjku lS dzfer gka us dk [krjk dbs xqZ .kk c<+ tkrk gA vr% izdj.kS e; izkFkZuk i= layXu dj lgkuqHkwfrioZd fopkj dj erd dh vkfJrk dks ns; ifjykHk fu;ekuqlkj Lohdr djkus dk Je djsaA”

¶72

This Court also observes that the pandemic was a time of terror and anxiety wherein the entire country had gone into a complete lock down and the people did not wish to leave the safety of their houses, and in such tiring times, the most overworked and burdened was the Health Sector of our country and to ensure the smooth functioning of the Health Sector various other departments of the Government were involved, one of them being the Electricity Department which played a pivotal role in ensuring the continuous supply of electricity to Hospitals and Quarantine Centres/Covid Care Centres, and thus, the personnel belonging to that department played an equally important role in the collective fight against the Covid 19 Virus.

¶73

To ensure that the family of such citizens of our country who were involved in the continuous fight against the Covid 19 would be taken care of in the unfortunate event of their bread winners losing their lives by succumbing to the said Virus, the Government had taken various measures of providing insurance policies and compensation in monetary terms, thus in the opinion of this Court, once it is established that the present petitioner (wife of deceased) is entitled to receive the compensation so accorded to families similarly situated as that of the present petitioner, such compensation should not be denied to the petitioner. Moreover,

(10 of 10)

[2024:RJ-JD:7173]

[CW-7194/2022]

the respondents, as reflected from the record, do not dispute the entitlement of the petitioner to receive the ex gratia amount of Rs.20 lakhs.

¶78

Thus, in light of the aforesaid observations and looking into the factual matrix of the present case, this Court is of the opinion that the present petition deserves to be allowed as it is clear that the respondents had themselves incorporated the payment of ex gratia amount of Rs. 50 Lakhs, the same being in addition to the Rs.20 Lakhs under the aforesaid Regulation and it is an established fact from the submitted RTPC test, death certificate and the letter dated 04.03.2021 that the deceased was completely falling into the category of the persons so covered by the order dated 05.06.2020.

¶79

Consequently the present petition is allowed . Accordingly, while quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 18.01.2021 (Annexure-16), the respondents are directed to pay to the petitioner a sum of Rs.70,00,000/- as ex gratia , after adjusting the ex gratia amount if any, already paid to the petitioner. Such exercise shall be undertaken and completed by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, failing which the aforesaid payable amount shall carry interest @ 9% per annum till the actual date of payment. All pending applications stand disposed of.

¶80

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.

¶81

SKant/-

Sugan Prajapat v. Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sugan Prajapat v. Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manohar Lal Bissu Vs the State of Rajasthan

Anil Vs State of Rajasthan

Raja Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Shankar Lal Vs State of Rajasthan

Badrilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Kanta Parihar Vs Shilpa Parihar