The Punjab and Haryana High Court has imposed a fine of ₹1 lakh on Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBVN) and Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. (HVPNL) for causing a 12-year delay in the disbursement of family pension to a widow, Sujata Mehta. The court’s ruling highlighted the “insensitive” handling of the case and directed the two state-run entities to compensate the petitioner with interest on the delayed pension arrears.
Case Background
The petitioner, Sujata Mehta, lost her husband, who had retired as a Reader-cum-Circle Superintendent from the erstwhile Haryana State Electricity Board (HSEB), in 2008. Following his death, she was entitled to receive a family pension. However, due to the bifurcation of HSEB into four separate entities after the implementation of the Haryana Electricity Act, 1997, her pension application was mishandled. Sujata Mehta applied to DHBVN for her family pension in 2010 but was directed to approach HVPNL instead.
Despite numerous attempts, the petitioner did not receive her pension until 2020, more than a decade after her initial application. Frustrated by the long delay, she filed a writ petition (CWP-18682-2022) seeking interest on the delayed pension and compensation for the suffering she endured while trying to claim her rightful pension.
Court’s Observations
Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, presiding over the case, strongly condemned the conduct of both DHBVN and HVPNL. In his ruling, he stated:
“The method adopted by the respondents in putting the petitioner, a poor widow, to run from one door to another is not only insensitive but is also highly deprecated.”
The court emphasized that it was the responsibility of the state bodies to ensure timely disbursement of family pensions and that Sujata Mehta should not have been burdened with navigating the technicalities of the bifurcation of HSEB. Justice Puri added:
“The entire onus fell upon the respondents–Statutory Bodies, and not upon a poor widow.”
He further noted that family pension is a statutory and constitutional right under Article 300-A of the Indian Constitution, referencing the landmark Supreme Court case Deokinandan Prasad v. State of Bihar to affirm that pension benefits are not a charity but a legal entitlement.
The Court’s Decision
The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the authorities to pay 6% simple interest per annum on the arrears of her pension from the date of her husband’s death until the pension was disbursed in 2020. The court set a deadline of three months for payment. Should the authorities fail to comply within this time frame, the interest rate will increase to 9% per annum.
In addition, the court imposed exemplary costs of ₹1 lakh on DHBVN and HVPNL, citing their gross negligence in handling the widow’s case. The fine is to be shared equally between the two entities, with each paying ₹50,000 to Sujata Mehta.
Case Details
– Case Title: Sujata Mehta v. Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others
– Case Number: CWP-18682-2022 (O&M)
– Bench: Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri
– Petitioner: Sujata Mehta
– Respondents: Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (DHBVN) and Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. (HVPNL)
– Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. S.K. Verma
– Advocate for Respondents: Mr. Ravinder S. Budhwar
