IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

205 Date of Decision: February 20, 2026 Sunita Rani @ Kushpreet Kaur .....Petitioner VERSUS Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (PUNSUP) and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Amrindra Pratap Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. H.S. Randhawa, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for respondent No.3.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)

1. The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ or order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner for appointment on compassionate in lieu of the death of her husband- Gurpal Singh, who was an employee at PUNSUP, Mansa. Further, a prayer has been made for directing the respondent-PUNSUP to release the pension along with other service benefits accrued to her husband w.e.f. from the date of his death along with arrears and interest @ 12% per annum.

CONTENTIONS

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that the petitioner's late husband, a regular employee of the respondent–PUNSUP, died in harness on 13.07.2018. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the deceased employee, and the validity of the marriage has never been disputed. Despite this, neither has her claim for appointment on compassionate grounds been considered nor have the family pension and other service benefits been released to her till date, even though more than seven years have elapsed since the death of her husband. It is further submitted that after the demise of her husband, the petitioner was subjected to domestic violence at the hands of her in-laws and was ousted from her matrimonial home. She is stated to be in acute financial distress and on the verge of destitution. Learned counsel further contends that her in-laws compelled her to furnish an undertaking stating that she had no objection if her brother-in-law was appointed on compassionate grounds in lieu of the death of her husband. The said undertaking was submitted by her under coercion, in order to maintain peace with her matrimonial family. However, the respondent–PUNSUP did not consider the claim of the brother-in-law either. Subsequently, being the dependent widow of the deceased employee, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment in terms of the applicable policy.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent–PUNSUP submits that the petitioner gave an undertaking stating that she would have no objection if her brother-in-law is considered for compassionate instead of her. However, on 28.08.2018, she withdrew her consent and requested that she may herself be considered. The petitioner was provided a booklet containing the list of necessary documents for consideration for compassionate appointment. It was discovered that certain documents were missing, thus, vide letter dated 05.11.2019 (Annexure P-5), she was duly informed about it. Meanwhile, respondent No.3- mother-in-law of the petitioner, moved representations before respondent-PUNSUP requesting that Navneet Kaur, minor daughter of the deceased, be considered for service benefits and that the job be reserved till she attains the age of majority.

4. Further, instructions dated 19.09.2002 issued by the Department of Personnel, Government of Punjab (Annexure R-1) required that in case of multiple claimant/dependents, an NOC from all legal heirs/dependents and a legal heir/dependent certificate issued by the concerned District Commissioner as must be submitted to be considered for compassionate appointment. As such, the matter was referred to the District Commissioner, Mansa, who vide his reply dated 07.11.2019, stated that on account of the family feud, the dependent/legal heir certificate be obtained from the concerned Civil Court. The petitioner and respondent No.3 were informed of this as well. However, instead of com