Can’t deprive eligible persons of benefits due to clerical errors: Haryana rights panel

The Haryana Human Rights Commission has taken a stern stance against arbitrary rejections and delays in the Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Antyodaya Parivar Suraksha (Dayalu) Yojana — meant to provide financial assistance to families of deceased earning members from economically weaker sections (as per the verified Family ID) — caused by clerical errors.

While adjudicating a complaint, the commission said a claim under the scheme had been rejected solely due to a discrepancy between the deceased’s age on the death certificate and in the Family ID.

It ruled that such rejections were arbitrary, and defeated the very purpose of the welfare scheme.

The commission directed authorities to reopen claims upon submission of corrected documents without subjecting applicants to a fresh process; establish a clear correction mechanism to allow applicants to reactivate claims through a simple application with revised documents; set up district-level grievance redressal cells with representatives from the Social Welfare Department and the Birth and Death Registrar; ensure these cells record complaints; provide guidance; and deliver time-bound solutions and launch public awareness campaigns and display scheme-related information at key public locations.

A spokesperson of the commission said it had also directed the Chief Executive Officer of the Haryana Family Security Trust, the Deputy Commissioner of Jind, and the Administrative Officer of the Trust to submit detailed reports explaining why the case was not reopened despite the documents having been corrected.

These reports were also to outline provisions for review and preventive measures against such lapses in future.

Subsequently, reports confirmed that the complainant’s claim had now been reopened, revised documents had uploaded, and the case was under process.

However, Justice Batra expressed concern over the fact that earlier rejection letters merely cited discrepancies, without guiding applicants on corrective steps.

He stressed the need for reasoned (speaking) orders that not only stated grounds for rejection, but also advised on rectification.

Justice Batra said: “Clerical errors cannot become a ground to deprive eligible beneficiaries of welfare rights. Transparency and reasoned orders are the backbone of welfare governance.”

The complainant had clarified that the age variation was a minor clerical mistake, later corrected with a revised death certificate. Despite this, authorities initially failed to reopen and reconsider the claim.

The commission observed that the Dayalu scheme lost its purpose if benefits were denied even after corrections in official records — reflecting administrative apathy.

Justice Batra said: “Denying any eligible person the benefits of welfare schemes due to clerical errors amounts to a violation of basic human dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. As an organ of the State, authorities are duty-bound to ensure timely delivery of welfare benefits, particularly to the economically weaker sections.”