IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:-10.02.2026 Mohan Singh Jaswal ...Petitioner Versus State of UT Chandigarh and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present: Mr. Jashandeep Singh Bains, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate for respondent No.3.

****

SUVIR SEHGAL, J.(ORAL)

1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in November, 2023, petitioner was attacked by a stray dog and was granted compensation of Rs.30,000/- by the respondents. He states that another incident took place on 22.05.2025 when petitioner was on a morning walk. He asserts that a stray dog attacked the petitioner, who suffered four deep Category III wounds and was treated at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Institute of Medical Sciences, Sector – 56, Mohali. Counsel states that a DDR, Annexure P2, was lodged on 05.06.2025 and petitioner submitted a representation vide Diary No.5017 dated 02.07.2025 with the respondents for grant of compensation. Counsel emphasizes that despite a lapse of more than six months, he has not been provided any financial aid.

2. Advance copy of the petition has been served upon respondents.

3. Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.3 and has filed vakalatnama, which is taken on record. He has placed on record a copy of notification bearing No.C-35904- FII(9)-2024/1077 dated 02.07.2024 to submit that in compliance of the directions passed by this Court, a committee, namely, Chandigarh Stray Animals Incidents/Accidents Compensation Committee, headed by Deputy Commissioner, U.T. Chandigarh has been constituted to examine such cases. Mr. Ghai states that the compensation is assessed on the basis of information received from the medical institute and repeated communications have been sent to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Institute of Medical Sciences, Mohali, but they have remained unattended.

4. By that as it may, representation submitted by the petitioner is not being denied by the respondents. The representation is pending with them for the last more than six months.

5. In view thereof, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to decide the representation as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

6. It is clarified that in case the respondents find that the petitioner is not entitled to compensation, they shall pass a detailed order assigning reasons for rejection.

(SUVIR SEHGAL)

10.02.2026 JUDGE Brij