Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 31 (HP)

Veena Devi v. State of H. P.

2020-01-02

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2020
JUDGMENT : Ajay Mohan Goel, J. By way of this petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following relief: “(a) This Hon?ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents to release a sum of Rs.5 lacs as compassionate compensation alongwith 12% interest from the date of death of the husband of the petitioner.” 2. Undisputed facts necessary to be referred for the purpose of adjudication of the present petition are that deceased Hans Raj, husband of the petitioner, was serving as a Constable in the Himachal Pradesh Police Department. In the year 2009, he was working as Constable No. 282 at Police Station Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P. On account of ensuing Lok Sabha elections, he was deputed for election duty to Police Station Gohar, where he reported as such alongwith other police officials, as is evident from entry in Annexure P-2, i.e., Daily Station Diary of Police Station Gohar, which was so entered one Shri Tej Ram, in which, the name of deceased Hans Raj is also entered. Thereafter, deceased Hans Raj was supposed to reach at Polling Booth Gawar at Government Middle School Janjahar, District Mandi (Lok Sabha Constituency Mandi, Himachal Pradesh), but he did not reach there. Sector Incharge Jashmer Singh telephonically intimated Dy.S.P. Headquarters qua the absence of deceased from duty. Thereafter, his dead body was found on 20.05.2009 floating in BSL Canal/Reservoir, which was subsequently taken out of the same. 3. Case of the petitioner is that as her husband had died while on election duty, therefore, she is entitled for ex-gratia amount on account of death of her husband in terms of Annexure P-1, which is Communication dated 29th April, 2009, issued by Additional Secretary (Election), Government of Himachal Pradesh. 4. While resisting the claim of the petitioner, the stand taken by the respondent-State is that as deceased Hans Raj was actually deputed for election duty at Polling Booth Gawar at Government Middle School Janjahar and he did not report for duty there, therefore, the case is not covered under Instructions dated 29th April, 2009 and accordingly, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. 5. During the pendency of this petition, the Election Commission of India was impleaded as a party vide order dated 17.06.2019 and the said respondent was called upon to file its reply/short affidavit. 5. During the pendency of this petition, the Election Commission of India was impleaded as a party vide order dated 17.06.2019 and the said respondent was called upon to file its reply/short affidavit. Short affidavit so filed on behalf of the said respondent is on record. The same has been filed on the affidavit of Additional Chief Electoral Officer, Himachal Pradesh. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith. 7. It is not in dispute, as I have already mentioned hereinabove also, that deceased Hans Raj was deputed on election duty from Police Station Sundernagar and for the said purpose, he initially reported at Police Station Gohar, which is evident from Annexure P-2. From Police Station Gohar, deceased Hans Raj was supposed to reach at Polling Booth Gawar at Government Middle School Janjahar for the purpose of election duty, however, while on his way, he went missing and his dead body was recovered from BSL Canal/Reservoir at Sundernagar on 20/21 May, 2009. 8. Communication dated 25th April, 2014, which is appended with the short affidavit filed by respondent No. 6, inter alia, envisages in Clause-3 therein that payment of ex-gratia compensation to family of polling personnel, who die or sustain injuries while on election duty, will be applicable to all personnel deployed in all types of election duties. The applicable period of election duty would start from the date of announcement of the elections and it would be reasonable to consider a person on election duty as soon as he/she leave his/her residence/office to report for any election related duty including training and until he/she reaches back, his/her residence/office after performance of his/her election duty. If any mishap takes place during this period, it should be treated as having occurred on election duty, subject to condition that there should be a casual connection between occurrence of death/injury and the election duty. For ready reference, Clause 3(c) of the said communication is quoted hereinbelow: “3 (c) It is clarified that it would be reasonable to consider a person on election duty as soon as he/she leaves his/her residence/office to report for any election related duty including training and until he/she reaches back his/her residence/office after performance of his/her election related duty. For ready reference, Clause 3(c) of the said communication is quoted hereinbelow: “3 (c) It is clarified that it would be reasonable to consider a person on election duty as soon as he/she leaves his/her residence/office to report for any election related duty including training and until he/she reaches back his/her residence/office after performance of his/her election related duty. If any mishap takes place during this period, it should be treated as having occurred on election duty subject to condition that there should be a casual connection between occurrence of death/injury and the election duty. (As explained in Commission?s letter No.218/6/2006/EPS dated 05.11.2008).” 9. In my considered view, the case of the petitioner is clearly covered under the provisions of Clause-3(c) of communication dated 25th April, 2014, as deceased Hans Raj went missing after he had left his original office, i.e., Police Station Sundernagar while on election duty and when he was on his way to Polling Booth Gawar at Government Middle School Janjahar. In fact, the stand which has been taken by the respondent-State is also that it was while deceased Hans Raj was on his way to the Booth concerned to which he was deputed for the purpose of election duty that he went missing. 10. As Hans Raj had already left his office to report for election duty and he died before he reached the Booth in question, the same has to be treated as an accident, which occurred on election duty in terms of Clause-3(c) of Communication dated 25.04.2014, because as there is no material to the contrary from which it can be inferred that Hans Raj did not die while on election duty. 11. Clause-3(e) of Communication dated 25th April, 2014 categorically lays down that the expenditure on account of payment of ex-gratia compensation to the polling personnel has to be borne by Government of India during election of Lok Sabha. As deceased was deputed on election duty pertaining to Mandi Constituency of Lok Sabha, therefore, the expenditure qua ex-gratia compensation, but natural, has to be borne by the Government of India in terms of Communication dated 25.04.2014 issued by the Election Commission of India. 12. As deceased was deputed on election duty pertaining to Mandi Constituency of Lok Sabha, therefore, the expenditure qua ex-gratia compensation, but natural, has to be borne by the Government of India in terms of Communication dated 25.04.2014 issued by the Election Commission of India. 12. In view of the above observations, this writ petition is allowed by holding that petitioner-Veena Devi is entitled for ex-gratia payment in terms of Annexure P-1, as her husband lost his life while on election duty, with issuance of mandamus to the Government of India (Ministry of Law and Justice, Legislative Department, New Delhi), to pay compensation to the petitioner in terms of Clause-3(e) of Communication dated 25th April, 2014. Government of Himachal Pradesh is initially directed to make payment of ex-gratia compensation to the petitioner and thereafter, it may proceed to recover the said amount from the Government of India under Clause 3(f) of Communication dated 25th April, 2014 (Annexure R6/C). Let the needful be done within a period of two months from today. It is clarified that in case the exgratia payment is not made within a period of two months from today, then the amount shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the writ petition till the date of actual payment. Petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any.