Teeja Devi v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 15.05.2026 TEEJA DEVI

...Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present :

Mr. Jitender Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Svaneel Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of orders dated 04.11.2024 (Annexure P-12), 10.09.2025 (Annexure P-17) as well as communication dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure P-15) whereby respondents have rejected her claim for compensation. She is further seeking compensation amounting to Rs.5 lakh under Mukhya Mantri Kisan Evam Khetehar Majdoor Jiwan Suraksha Yojna, 2013 (for short '2013 Yojana'). She is also seeking setting

-2aside of order (Annexure P-23) whereby respondent has rejected her claim under DAYALU scheme on the ground of delay.

2.

The petitioner is a homemaker who along with her husband falls under the category of Below Poverty Line (for short 'BPL') family. Their son passed away on 29.07.2024 due to electrocution while changing water pipeline in the agricultural field. In this regard DDR No.017 dated 30.07.2024 was registered at Police Station Jui Kalan Bhiwani. Post-mortem report dated 30.07.2024 details injuries and cause of death. She filed application seeking compensation under 2013 Yojana. Her claim was rejected on the ground that the deceased passed away due to electrocution at home. She unsuccessfully preferred appeal. She served legal notice dated 25.07.2025 upon the respondent seeking compensation which was rejected vide order dated 10.09.2025. She had also filed application dated 12.11.2024 to the respondent seeking compensation under the DAYALU scheme which was rejected on the ground of delay.

3.

Learned State counsel submits that there was delay of 9 days in filing application under DAYALU Scheme, thus, application was rejected. 4.

On being confronted with order dated 27.03.2026 passed by this Court in CWP-9253-2026, learned State counsel, on instructions from Mr. Arun Sharma, Haryana Parivar Suraksha Nyas submits that the petitioner's claim in terms of the afore-said order would be considered and her grievance would be redressed within a period of six weeks from today.

-35.

Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to the aforesaid arrangement.

6.

Disposed of in terms of statements of both sides. 7.

Pending Misc. Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. May 15, 2026 [JAGMOHAN BANSAL] gurpreet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No