1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P.(S) No.7458 of 2011

-------

Sita Devi

…

…

Petitioner

Versus

1.

Jharkhand State Electricity Board, through Deputy

Director Personnel, Electric Supply Area, Ranchi.

2.

Deputy Director Accounts, Electric Supply Area,

Ranchi.

3.

Electrical Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply

Circle, Gumla.

4.

General

Manager-cum-Chief

Engineer

Electric

Supply Area, Ranchi.

5.

Electrical

Executive

Engineer,

Electric

Supply

Division, Simdega.

6.

Electric Supply Sub Division, Kolebira, Simdega.

…

…Respondents

-------

CORAM

: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

-------

For the Petitioner

:Ms. Rajni Singh, Adv.

For the Res-State

: Ms. SSaumya S. Pandey, A.C to

A.A.G.-I

For the Res. JUVNL : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.

-------

C.A.V. on 11.02.2022

Pronounced on 5/5/2022

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

The instant writ application has been preferred

by the petitioner praying therein for quashing of the letter

No.3454 dated 19.11.11.issued by respondent No.4 by

which a decision of the Members of the Committee with

respect to the claim of the petitioner for grant of

Rs.1,00,000/- (One lakh) to the petitioner, who is wife of

2

the deceased employee of the respondent-Company,

under the scheme of Accident Compensation in terms of

provision of Board contained in letter No.261/EB dated

28.2.1997 has been rejected.

3.

Ms. Rajni Singh, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner had earlier moved

before this Court in W.P.(S) No.2206 of 2008, which was

disposed of vide order dated 20.7.2011 with a direction to

the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the

Managing Director-cum-Chief Engineer, Jharkhand State

Electricity Board, raising all her claims which have been

raised in her applicationand the respondents were

directed to take a decision in the matter of payment of

compensation towards relief of Rs.1,00,000/- and if the

amount was found payable the same shall be paid to the

petitioner immediately.

Learned counsel further submits that the

petitioner’s husband was an employee of Jharkhand

State Electricity Board and he died on account of

electrocution during course of his employment and

therefore the petitioner being widow of deceased

employee put forth her claim under the Workmen’s

Compensation Act and also under the Bihar State

Electricity Board Accident Compensation Scheme, 1988.

She further submits that compensation which was to be

paid under the Workmen’s Compensation Act has already

3

been paid but compensation towards relief of Rs.1,

00,000/- under the Accident Compensation in terms of

Provision of Board has not been paid. She contended that

the petitioner was entitled for accident compensation of

Rs.1,00,000/- in terms of provisions of Board’s letter as

contained in letter No.261/EB dated 28.02.1997.

She further draws attention of this Court

towards the impugned order wherein the accident

compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- has been rejected on

technical ground that the legal heir was required to make

application within a period of two months from the date

of incident. However, since the same was not done and

the claim was made belatedly; as such her claim has

been rejected.

4.

Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel appearing

for JUVNL draws attention of this Court towards

Annexure-A which is letter dated 28.2.1997 with regard

to payment of compensation and as per the said letter; in

special clause ‘C’ it has been mentioned that immediately

after the accident the Electrical Executive Engineer shall

send a copy of the proforma enclosed to the family

members of the deceased workmen with a request to fill

up the form and return the same to him within 10 days

and as per the procedure, a letter wa