Civil Writ Petition No. 19647 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 19647 of 2010 Date of decision: 07.03.2011 Smt. Sunita ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. Anil Ghanghas, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Shruti Jain, AAG, Haryana for the State. RANJIT SINGH J. This order will dispose of three Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 19647, 19689 and 19754 of 2010. The prayer in the writ petitions is for issuing direction to the respondents to pay the claim of the petitioners under Rajiv Gandhi Parivar Bima Yojna alongwith interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of application till the date of payment. The facts are being taken from CWP No. 19647 of 2010. The State of Haryana introduced the scheme by the name of Rajiv Gandhi Parivar Bima Yojna on 15.04.2008. As per this, citizens between the age of 18 to 60 years are covered for insurance cover of Rs. 1 lakh, which is payable on account of accidental death etc. For implementing the scheme, the Government has entered into Memorandum of Understanding with Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. for one year w.e.f. 28.03.2008 on Civil Writ Petition No. 19647 of 2010 2 certain terms and conditions. The income tax payee and employees are excluded from the scheme. The husband of the petitioner had died on 07.07.2008 in tubewell accident. The petitioner, accordingly, applied for payment under the scheme. Respondent No. 4, who is Nodal officer, after scrutinizing the document sent the case on 22.06.2009 for making payment. Since then the petitioner has been visiting the office of the respondents but so far amount has not been released. Accordingly, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. On the basis of same scheme,the petitioner in CWP No. 19689 of 2010 has filed a claim for payment due to accidental death of her husband, who died in road accident on 05.10.2008. His case has also been sent for payment after verification but respondent No. 2 has not made any payment so far. Similarly, in CWP No. 19754 of 2010, the petitioner has filed the claim on account of death of her husband, who died in road accident on 29.01.2009. After scrutiny, she was considered entitled to the claim and it was forwarded for payment on 12.10.2009. Like other cases, the present petitioner, who is wife of the deceased, has filed this writ petition when the amount is not released and for realizing the amount due to her. Despite opportunity, no reply has been filed by the Insurance company. Respondent No. 4, however, has filed reply in CWP No. 19754 of 2010. Respondent No. 4 is a nodal officer and has clearly averred in the reply that the case of the petitioners was sent on 12.10.2009 for disbursement of the amount but respondent No. 2 has failed to respond and to make the payment. Respondent No. 4, accordingly, pleads that the Court should take action against Civil Writ Petition No. 19647 of 2010 3 respondent No. 2. The plea of respondent No. 4 is not without basis. It is seen that fault lies with respondent No. 2/Insurance Company, who despite having entered into an agreement with the State is not standing by the commitment made with the State. The State cannot simply pass on his responsibility by sending the claim to insurance company. It would always remain duty bound to ensure implementation of the scheme formulated by it. No response has been filed in the remaining writ petitions and it is seen that the cases of the petitioner in all these three writ petitions are fully covered by the scheme and the petitioners are entitled to the payment. These writ petitions have been filed for claiming amount which was directed to be paid in 2009. The Insurance company despite service has chosen not to put in appearance. Apparently, the insurance company has no defence to raise and has chosen to remain absent despite service. This Court is left with no alternative but to allow these writ petitions. The writ petitions are, accordingly, allowed. Directions are hereby issued to respondent No. 2 to release the payment in each case within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Each petitioner shall be entitled to costs of Rs. 10,000/-. This shall be paid by respondent No. 2/Insurance Company. The petitioners shall be entitled to receive this amount of Rs. 1 lakh with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date it is due till the date of payment. The State would ensure that the amount is released to the petitioner and in this regard would make every effort that payment is released by respondent No. 2. In case, the amount is not Civil Writ Petition No. 19647 of 2010 4 released within the stipulated time, the petitioners would be at liberty to approach this Court for execution or for initiating any proceedings including that of contempt against respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 2 shall be liable to reimburse the entire expenditure incurred by the petitioners in this regard. March 07, 2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE