Claims for compensation must adhere to statutory limitation periods regardless of prior acceptance or attempts to resolve them.

Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

By means of the present writ petition under filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India , petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

(i). To issue any suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari by quashing the order dated 05.06.2023 passed by learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Haridwar.

(ii). To issue any suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to take decision upon the several applications of the petitioner for releasing the pending compensation of amount of Rs.10,000/- and further ask them to pay interest on the rate of interest as applicable upon the pending compensation amount of Rs.10,000/- since from

19.10.1995.

2. The brief facts of the case are that Late Ashok Kumar Sharma(since deceased)-father of the petitioner was employed with department of respondent No.4 and on 18.09.1989, he died due to electric shock while performing his duties for Telephone Exchange upon an iron pole situated at Gurudwara Road, Kathara Bajar. Petitioner was minor at the time of his father’s death and therefore, the uncle of petitioner (brother of deceased) had raised issue for compensation. Ultimately vide letter dated 19.10.1995, respondent No.3 decided to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation towards the dependant of Late Shri Ashok Kumar Sharma, Regular Labour, Telephone Exchange Department, Haridwar and accordingly, the acceptance letter was issued. After issuance of letter dated 19.10.1995, when no compensation was paid by the concerned Department, the uncle of petitioner again raised the issue moving an application dated 23.04.1997. Thereafter, petitioner himself after getting age of majority started agitating the issue for releasing the compensation as awarded by respondents vide its letter dated 19.10.1995. Again, petitioner on 21.12.2007 preferred a reminder letter/ application to the concerned respondent’s department. Thereafter, on 31.12.2009 also sought relevant information through RTI application but all was in vein. On 22.07.2022, a legal notice was issued in this regard and simultaneously, the petitioner also filed a complaint No.96 of 2022 Sunil Kumar Sharma Vs. Executive Engineer, Power Distribution Section, Haridwar, before the learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Haridwar on 30.11.2022, and vide its order dated 05.06.2023, the complaint of the petitioner was rejected on the ground of limitation. Thereafter, the petitioner also filed an application/ reminder letter to the respondent No.3 on 17.10.2024 and 20.12.2024. On 04.01.2025, he through his advocate sent legal notices in this regard. The concerned respondent’s department through their counsel replied the petitioner that his claim is time barred and the learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Haridwar has already rejected the complaint on the grounds of limitation.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even after the specific directions and acceptance of issuance of compensation amount of Rs.10,000/- and further upon regular requests and correspondence through letters, the concerned departments are not releasing the pending compensation in favour of the dependants of late Shri Ashok Kumar Sharma, who was the employee of P & T Haridwar. The petitioner and other dependants are running from pillar to post for just releasing the admitted pending compensation amount of Rs.10,000/-, but all was in vein and now, the respondent departments are denying the claim of the petitioner saying it time barred.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 & 4 filed counter affidavit along with a delay condonation application (IA/1/2025). Delay in filing the counter affidavit is condoned. Counter affidavit is taken on record. Delay Condonation Application (IA/1/2025) ma