Back
SANJEEV NARULA
Darshana Rani – Appellant
Versus
Government NCT Of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Sanjeev Narula, J.)
1. Mrs. Darshana Rani, the Petitioner, a widow and senior citizen, seeks directions for payment of life insurance claim of INR 10 Lakhs under the Chief Minister Advocate Welfare Scheme,[“CMAWS”] on account of the death of her son, Late Sh. Kamal Khurana, Advocate.
2. The CMAWS was introduced by Government of NCT of Delhi,[“GNCTD”] vide Cabinet Decision No. 2794 dated 18th December, 2019, for the benefit of Advocates enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi,[“BCD”], who are the residents of Delhi. The stated object of the scheme is to recognise the role and contributions of Advocates in society and the growth of the legal fraternity, in terms of building a strong democracy, encouraging active citizen engagement as well as participation in nation building. The scheme was approved by the Cabinet in 2019 and an annual outlay of INR 50 Crores was created for implementation of the scheme.
3. To enhance the welfare of advocates, benefits under the scheme included: Group (Term) Insurance policy of Life Insurance Corporation of India,[“LIC”], providing a life cover of Rs. 10 Lakhs per advocate; Group Medi-claim coverage through New India Assurance Company Ltd,[“NI
Eligibility for life insurance benefits under the Chief Minister Advocate Welfare Scheme requires verification of credentials, which was not completed before the claimant's death.
scheme of the Advocates Act, 1961 as also the various Bar Council Rules and Regulations give primacy to the place of practice and not residence. Governmental policies are amenable to judicial review ....
The employer is obligated to ensure employee insurance coverage, and non-deduction of premiums does not negate compensation claims under the Group Personal Accident Insurance Scheme.
Compassionate appointment rights are not vested; applicants are entitled to consideration under the prevailing scheme at the time their applications are assessed.
Eligibility for admission as 'Ward of Insured Person' does not require receipt of benefits under the ESI Act, but rather being eligible as defined.
The court affirmed the appointments under the death in harness category, recognizing applicants in a frozen panel while mandating financial assessment procedures.
The term 'bread earner' in insurance policies includes all contributing family members, not just the head of the family, ensuring broader eligibility for compensation.
The court affirmed that both 'head of the family' and 'bread earner' can apply to different family members, allowing claims for compensation under the insurance scheme.
Court directed verification of advocates' credentials for inclusion in the welfare scheme, emphasizing transparency and efficient processes for remedying exclusions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
