ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. Special leave granted. 3. Appellants husband was a workman employed with the respondent He died in a road accident on 31-3-1989 The appellant requested the respondent. in terms of par a 5.8 of the settlement, to employ either the Para 5.8 is in following terms: "It is agreed that Management will provide employment to one dependant of each workman who is permanently disabled or dies as a result of accident while on duty on compassionate and humanitarian considerations Dependant for this purpose will mean spouse employee, his/her son or daughter or legally adopted son or daughter only." The respondent declined the request and as such the appellant sought a mandamus from the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indin. The High Court dismissed the writ petition by the following order: "Shri Namdeo for the petitioner. The petitioners prayer is for appointment of her son or herself on a civil job in NTPC. She is widow of Shri C.P. Pandey who died while proceeding to join duties. He was an employee in NTPC. In view of the clear provision contained in clause 5.8 of the memorandum of agreement between the employer and the employee, we are of the opinion that in rejecting the prayer the employer commiued no error and we cannot entertain this petition and issue a writ for the relief claimed. All the same, in view of the fact that the deceased Shri Pandey died while he was proceeding to join his duties and in view of that fact that none of the heirs left behind by the deceased is employed any where, National Thermal Power Corporation may give a second thought to the Arising out of SLP (C) No. 21560 of 1993matter and exhibit a more sympathetic attitude towards the petitioner and if possible accommodate her. The petition is accordingly disposed of." The short question for our consideration is whether the appellants husband died "while on duty". The case of the appellant is that her husband, while on way to join the duty, was unfortunately involved in an accident and died. The petition is accordingly disposed of." The short question for our consideration is whether the appellants husband died "while on duty". The case of the appellant is that her husband, while on way to join the duty, was unfortunately involved in an accident and died. The High Court observed in its order that "she is widow of Shri C.P. Pandey who died while proceeding to join duties" and "Shri Pandey died while he was proceeding to join his duties...." In the facts of this case, it cannot be disputed that the appellants husband cried while he was on way to join his duty. Mr Pai, learned Senior Advocate disputed the fact that the deceased was on his way to join the duty. We do not agree. The respondent never challenged the factual statement made before the High Court by way of review. We are of the view that when a workman becomes permanently disabled or dies in an accident while proceeding to the place of his duty from home or returning from the place of his duty to home, he should be deemed to have died or become disabled while on duty. No other view can be taken of such a situation. We, therefore, direct the respondent to offer employment in terms of para 5.8 either to the appellant or to her sou by the end of February 1995. Either of them when appointed may join the service of the respondent-Corporation on 1-3-1995. The appeal is allowed. No costs. For Citation: (1995) 3 SCC (Suppl.) 680 Vikas Info Solutions Pvt. Ltd.