DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

High Court slams Haryana power company for delay in widow’s family pension

Orders Rs 1 lakh exemplary costs for 12-year delay in granting pension
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
“If a bifurcation of the Haryana State Electricity Board has been done by way of an act of legislature then it was the job and burden of the Boards, and not of the poor widow to have known the technicalities,” the court observed. File photo
Advertisement

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ordered Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (DHBVN) and Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (HVPNL) to together pay Rs 1 lakh exemplary costs to a widow unjustly deprived of family pension for 12 years after observing that she was compelled to navigate a convoluted process that should have been managed by the statutory bodies.

Advertisement

Admonishing the authorities concerned for abdicating their duties, Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri observed petitioner Sujata Mehta first filed for family pension before DHBVN after her husband passed away on May 19, 2008. Instead of processing the application, DHBVN informed her in 2010 to submit a separate application to HVPNL.

Justice Puri added the petitioner resubmitted her application. DHBVN, on its part, forwarded the application to HVPNL in 2019, though the process could have been completed way back in 2010. The court asserted the widow should not have been burdened with technical complexities stemming from the bifurcation of the Haryana State Electricity Board.

Advertisement

The judge added the entire responsibility rested with the respondents—statutory bodies—and not on the widow. The approach taken by the respondents, forcing the petitioner to run from one office to another, was not only insensitive “but is also highly deprecated”.

“If a bifurcation of the Haryana State Electricity Board has been done by way of an act of legislature then it was the job and burden of the Boards, and not of the poor widow to have known the technicalities,” the court observed.  

Advertisement

Elaborating on the legal framework surrounding pension rights, Justice Puri asserted the petitioner was not required to submit any application to any agency, as there was no dispute regarding her status as a widow. It was the respondents’ responsibility “to have taken care of the widow for grant of family pension”.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts