110 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ****

Date of Decision:11.02.2026 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ....APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS SANTOSH DEVI ….RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Mr. Rajesh Gaur, Addl., AG, Haryana.

****

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (Oral)

CM-1012-LPA-2026

1. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed on behalf of the applicants-appellants seeking condonation of delay of 391 days in filing the accompanying appeal.

2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the delay of 391 days in filing the accompanying appeal stands condoned.

Main Case (O&M)

3. This appeal is by the State of Haryana assailing the judgment of the learned Single Judge, whereby benefits to the respondent-widow have been granted in terms of Rule 5 & 6 of the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 (for short, ‘the Rules of 2006’).

4. The issue that fell for consideration has been crystallized by the learned Single Judge in paragraph No.6 of the judgment which reads as under:-

“…...whether the petitioner is entitled to compassionate financial assistance in terms of the 2006 Rules, despite having been sanctioned family pension on account of her husband’s demise in harness…...”

5. Rules 5 & 6 of the Rules of 2006 have also been reproduced, which are as under:-

“5. (1) On the death of any Government employee, the family of the employee would continue to receive as financial assistance a sum equal to the pay and other allowances that was last drawn by the deceased employee in the normal course without raising a specific claim.-

(a) for a period of fifteen years from the date of death of the employee, if the employee at the time of his death had not attained the age of thirty-five years;

(b) for a period of twelve years or till the date the employee would have retired from Government service on attaining the age of superannuation, whichever is less, if the employee at the time of his death had attained the age of thirty-five years but had not attained the age of forty-eight years;

(c) for a period of seven years or till the date the employee would have retired from Government service on attaining the age of superannuation, whichever is less, if the employee had attained the age of forty-eight years.

(2) The family shall be eligible to receive family pension as per the normal rules only after the period during which he receives the financial assistance as above is completed. (3) to (5) xxx xxx xxx

6. All pending cases of ex-gratia assistance shall be covered under the new rules. The calculation of the period and payment shall be made to such cases from the date of notification of these rules. However, the families will have the option to opt for the lump sum ex-gratia grant provided in the Rules, 2003 or 2005, as the case may be, in lieu of the monthly financial assistance provided under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of the Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006.”

6. The learned Single Judge has examined the facts of the case and observed that although the death of the employee occurred prior to the introduction of the Rules of 2006, the said Rules were still found to be applicable in view of the language employed therein, which provides that all pending cases of ex gratia assistance were to be covered by the new Rules. It is not factually disputed that the claim of the respondent was pending when the new Rules came into existence.

7. In such circumstances, by virtue of Rule 6, the Rules of 2006 became applicable. The learned Single Judge further observed that once the Rules of 2006 became applicable, the benefits that were due and admissible to the respondent-widow were required to be extended. In arriving at such a conclusion, the learned Single Judge has observed as under:-

“6.2 A bare perusal of these Rules shows that on death of a government employee,