IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 206-2 CWP-20802-2022 Date of decision : 14.07.2026 Veena and others ….Petitioners V/S State of Punjab and others ….Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. H.S. Dhindsa, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Raghav Garg, A.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev Soni, Advocate with Mr. Sarthak Soni, Advocate for respondents No.4 & 5. **** NAMIT KUMAR , J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioners have filed the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the revised and up-to date death-cum-terminal benefits, gratuity, provident fund, leave encashment, ex-gratia grant of Rs.14,00,000/- with interest @ 18% per annum w.e.f. November, 2013 to the petitioners (who are legal heirs of deceased employee-Deepa) as the benefits released to the petitioners are only partial payment released to them after more than 09 years and that too without interest. 2. Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that all the retiral dues of the deceased employee-Deepa, who was working as Sweeper in the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, have been released to his legal heirs in terms of the order dated 20.03.2019, passed by this VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.14 16:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-20802-2022 2 Court, in CWP No.10674 of 2018 titled as ‘Veena and others Vs. State of Punjab and others’. The said order reads as under :- “In the present writ petition, the claim of the petitioners is for release of the death-cum-retiral benefits of the husband of petitioner No.1 and father of petitioners No. 2 to 4, who died while in service on 21.11.2013. As per the facts mentioned in the writ petition, Deepa i.e. husband of petitioner No. 1 and father of petitioners No. 2 to 4 was working as a Safai Sewak with the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, who, unfortunately, died while in service on 21.11.2013. Petitioners have averred that Deepa had approximately 30 years of service to his credit when he died on 21.11.2013 and the petitioners who are the legal heirs of Deepa, are not being extended the benefits without any valid justification. Upon notice of motion, a short reply has been filed on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar. In the said reply, it has been stated that Deepa died while in service on 21.11.2013 but in official record, only name, which has been mentioned as nominee, is Ms. Sonia, daughter of his brother. Learned counsel for the respondents states that petitioners are required to submit a Succession Certificate and it is only after that the benefits can be released to them. Learned counsel states that these precautionary measures are being taken by the Department so that at a later stage, the Department is not put to any inconvenience with regard to the benefit release to the petitioners in case any claim is made by the nominee i.e. Ms. Sonia. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that nominee cannot be treated as a legal heir and the nominee is only a facilitator, whose role is only to ensure that the legal heirs get the amount for which they are entitled for. VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.14 16:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-20802-2022 3 Nominee is not a legal heir or the claimant of the amount. Learned counsel for the respondents states that the Corporation will release the amount in favour of the petitioners, in case the petitioners agree to give an affidavit to the effect that in case after the amount is released in their favour, if any claim is raised for the said amount by anyone else against the Corporation and it is found at that stage that the petitioners were not entitled for the said amount, the said amount will be recovered by the respondents after following the due procedure of law. Learned counsel for the petitioners is agreeable and states that due affidavit of all the petitioners in this regard will be submitted that in case after the amount is disbursed to them, any claim is raised for the said amount by anyone else against the Corporation and it is found that the petitioners were not entitled for the said amount, Corporation will be entitled to recover the said amount after following due procedure of law. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that Deepa, whose benefits are to be released to the petitioners died in November, 2013 i.e. more than five years ago and the petitioners are also entitled for interest in view of the settled principle of law settled by the Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Vs. State of Punjab, 1997 (3) SCT 468. In respect of the claim of interest, the petitioners shall make due representation to the respondents giving all the details and in case any such representation is filed by the petitioners, the respondents shall pass appropriate orders in view of the settled principle of law deciding about the entitlement of the petitioners about the interest on the said payment within a period of three months. In view of the above, let the petitioners give an affidavit as undertaken by them within a period of 15 days VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.14 16:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-20802-2022 4 from today and after the affidavit is given by the petitioners as undertaken by the counsel for the respondents, the amount which the petitioners are entitled for after the death of Deepa, shall be released to them within a period of next two months. Writ petition stands disposed of in above terms.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in pursuance to the abovesaid order, the petitioners have served a legal notice dated 21.05.2022 (Annexure P-6), however, neither interest on the delayed payments of retiral dues have been released to the petitioners nor the said legal notice has been replied. 4. To controvert the said contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondent No.4 & 5 submits that the said legal notice was never received in the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar as there is no post of Executive Officer and the Corporation shall not be averse to consider the claim of interest raised by the petitioners in the said legal notice in terms of the order dated 20.03.2019 passed by this Court in CWP No.10674 of 2018. 5. Keeping in view the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.4 to consider and decide legal notice dated 21.05.2022 (Annexure P-6) submitted by the petitioners by passing a speaking order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to them, within a period of 03 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 14.07.2026 (NAMIT KUMAR) kothiyal JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No VINOD KOTHIYAL 2026.07.14 16:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document