The court ruled that the interpretation of welfare circulars must favor the applicant when a duty-related accident occurs.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 22-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief/s:-

“I. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, commanding and directing the Respondent Authorities to pay the amount of Rs. 10 Lacs as ex-gratia grant to the petitioner pursuant to the Finance Department Resolution contained in memo no.78/2005-1441 dated 10.10.2013 on the ground that the husband of the petitioner met an accident on 11.07.2016 during the course of discharge of his duty and subsequently he died on 12.07.2016.

(II) For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, commanding and directing the Respondent Authorities to pay the interest over the amount of ex-gratia grant to the petitioner on the ground that the delay has been occurred due to latches and inaction on the part of the Respondents.

(III) For issuance of any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions for which the writ petitioner would be found entitled under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner was posted as an Assistant Sub- Inspector of Police in Bachhwara Rail Police Station. He submits that the husband of the petitioner along with the Station Head Officer of Bachhwara Rail Police Station and others proceeded from the police station by a government Bolero vehicle on 11.07.2016 to Barauni for raid in connection with Bachhwara Rail P.S Case No. 01 of 2016 registered for the offence under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. But, in the way, the said Bolero vehicle met with an accident with a Maruti Swift Car bearing Registration No. BR9P-3582. In result, the petitioner’s husband died. Counsel submits that after the death of the petitioner’s husband, the Superintendent of Police recommended his case for the grant of ex-gratia amont of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs), as the petitioner’s husband died while discharging his duties. Counsel submits that according to the Circular/Resolution contained in Memo No.78/2005-1441 dated 10.10.2013 (Annexure-P/4), it is categorically stated that while discharging duty, if, accident took place which resulted into death, then the dependent of that government servant become entitled to receive the ex-gratia amount. He submits that the said ex-gratia amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) has not been granted to the petitioner till date, and in-spite of the recommendation made by the Superintendent of Police, the payment has not been made. Therefore, the present writ petition has been filed for the said relief.

4. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that the petitioner is not entitled for ex-gratia amount, as the petitioner has already received accidental claim. But, the present case is not covered under the claim which the petitioner is demanding in the name of grant of ex-gratia during active performance of duty. He submits that there is distinction between discharging of duty and active performance of duty. He further submits that the case of the petitioner does not come under the active performance of duty and hence, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of ex-gratia, particularly in the light of Clause 3 and 4 of the Circular/Resolution contained in Memo No.78/2005-1441 dated 10.10.2013 (Annexure-P/4). 5. With a view to adjudicate the claim, it is necessary to quote the said Circular/Resolution contained in Memo No.78/2005-1441 dated 10.10.2013 (Annexure-P/4)

which is as follows:-

6. It transpires to this Court that the subject under which the said Circular/Resolution has been issued is already quo