IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.777 of 2008 Date of decision: 7.8.2008 Anita Rani -----Petitioner Vs. UHBVNL and others -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Mr. K.L.Dhingra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Narender Hooda, Advocate for the respondents. Adarsh Kumar Goel,J. 1. This petition seeks quashing of recovery from retrial benefits of husband of the petitioner. 2. Case of the petitioner is that her husband was employed in the Electricity Board and died in harness on 29.10.1996. Retiral benefits were given to the petitioner but a sum of Rs.63160/- was withheld as recovery of damaged transformers. No disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the husband of the petitioner during his life time and no order of punishment was passed. It has been explained in the petition that husband of the petitioner was to Civil Writ Petition No.777 of 2008 control and supervise the rural area covering 400 to 500 transformers and sometimes, transformers were burnt on account of heavy load without any fault of the supervising officer. As per policy of the respondents, various authorities were given power to write off such damages. The policy has been attached as Annexures P.2 and P.3. As per practice, such shortages/breakages are written off. Instances have been annexed as Annexures P.5 and P.6. Recovery is sought to be effected from the dues of the husband of the petitioner which is not on account of fault of the petitioner’s husband. The petitioner widow has no source of income and without any valid justification, loss caused could not be recovered from the terminal benefits payable to the petitioner. As per policy Annexure P.4 dated 22.10.2002, in case of officials who die while in service, the competent authority was allowed to write off the total amount of loss as a matter of amnesty. The petitioner made representation for writing off the loss in view of policy Annexure P.4 but no response was received. 3. In the reply filed, it has been stated that husband of the petitioner was charge sheeted and suspended and in pursuance of charge sheet, order of recovery of Rs.50,000/- was passed. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. The averments in para 4 of the writ petition with regard to existence of policy dated 22.10.2002, Annexure P.4 of writing 2 Civil Writ Petition No.777 of 2008 off the loss as amnesty have not been disputed. Relevant part of the policy is as under:- “In case of such official who die while in service, the competent authority under the above Delegation of Powers be allowed to write off total amount of loss with regard to the shortage/breakage including oil, as attributed to them, as a matter of amnesty.” 6. In view of undisputed averment with regard to the existence of policy which was being followed in respect of employees who have died and DB judgment of this Court in Dayawati v. UHBVNL and others, CWP No.1500 of 2008, decided on 1.5.2008, we allow this petition and direct the respondents to release the amount withheld from the terminal benefits of the husband of the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. The petition is disposed of. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge August 7, 2008 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) ‘gs’ Judge 3