CWP-27773-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (145) CWP-27773-2025 Date of decision:- 17.09.2025 Puspa Devi ... Petitioner Versus Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and another ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL Present:- Mr. Sunil K. Tandon, Advocate for the petitioner (THROUGH V.C.) **** SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL) 1. Instant petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter-alia for issuance of a writ, in the nature of mandamus, for grant of compensation on account of death of petitioner’s husband, Karnail Singh, due to electrocution. 2. Counsel submits that Karnail Singh, was working as a mason on 23.03.2021, he was electrocuted and died at the spot. Reference has been made by counsel to GD entry dated 23.03.2021 (Annexure P-3) and to the postmortem report (Annexure P-2), whereby the doctor has opined that cause of death is shock due to electrocution. Counsel asserts that respondents have framed a policy (Annexure P-7) for grant of compensation in case of fatal/non- fatal accidents of human beings due to electrocution and the petitioner has submitted representations (Annexures P-4 to P-6), which are pending. Counsel PRIYANKA 2025.09.19 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-27773-2025 -2- submits that the petitioner would be satisfied in case a direction is issued to the respondents to decide representation (Annexure P-6). 3. Issue notice of motion to the respondents. 4. Mr. Ravish Kaushik, Addl. AG, Haryana has put in appearance and accepts notice on their behalf. 5. Given the nature of order proposed to be passed, this Court does not deem it necessary to call upon the respondents to file a response. 6. A perusal of the averments of the writ petition show that the representations submitted by the petitioners are pending consideration at the hands of the respondents. In view thereof, without examining the merits of the claim, a command is issued to the competent authority to decide the representation (Annexure P-6) within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order. 7. It is clarified that in case the competent authority comes to the conclusion that request made in the representation cannot be acceded to, it shall pass a detailed order assigning reasons for rejection. 8. Writ petition is disposed of. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE 17.09.2025 pry Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No PRIYANKA 2025.09.19 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document