IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:-23.09.2025 Koushlya ...Petitioner Versus Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and anr.

...Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present : Mr. Sunil K. Tandon, Advocate for the petitioner (THROUGH V.C.)

****

SUVIR SEHGAL, J.(ORAL)

1. Instant petition has been filed, inter alia, for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to pay compensation of Rs.50 lakhs to the petitioner on account of death of her son, due to electrocution.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that Sher Singh, petitioner’s son was working as a contractual labour with M/s Vidyut Projects registered at Delhi in the Electricity Department. Counsel submits that while installing an electricity cable on 18.06.2021, he came in contact with 11 KV high voltage line and was electrocuted. Counsel asserts that petitioner’s son was taken to hospital, but was declared dead. He has made a reference to death certificate and postmortem report, Annexures P1 and P2, respectively to assert that the cause of death is “cardiogenic shock due to electric shock”. He states that an FIR was registered. Counsel submits that respondents have framed a policy dated 15.07.2019, Annexure P7, which provides for grant of compensation in case of fatal and non-fatal accidents due to electrocution. Counsel asserts that petitioner had submitted representations, Annexure P5 and P6, but they are still pending. Counsel submits that petitioner would be satisfied in case a direction is issued to the competent authority to examine the representation, Annexure P6.

3. Issue notice of motion to the respondents.

4. Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Addl. A.G., Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondents.

5. Given the nature of order proposed to be passed, this Court does not deem it necessary to call response from the respondents.

6. From the averments made in the writ petition, it transpires that representations submitted by petitioner are pending. In view thereof, without examining the claim on merits, writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to decide the representation, Annexure P6, within a period of four months from the date of communication of copy of this order.

7. It is clarified that in case the competent authority finds that claim cannot be accepted, it shall pass a detailed order assigning reasons for its rejection.

(SUVIR SEHGAL)

23.09.2025 JUDGE Brij