MAMTA vs STATE OF HARYANA

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *** 123 CWP-13818-2026 Date of Decision: 05.05.2026 MAMTA …Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA & ANOTHER …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Rajesh Goyal, Advocate for petitioner Ms. Svaneel Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana Mr. Deepak Vashisht, DAG, Haryana *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of communication whereby her claim for compensation under Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Antyodaya Parivar Suraksha Yojna (for short ‘Deen Dayal Yojna’) has been rejected on the ground of delay. 2. As per petition, the petitioner’s husband passed away on 26.07.2024. He was 43 years’ old. His annual family income as per Parivar Pehchan Patra was less than Rs.1,00,000/-. The petitioner filed online application on 26.11.2024 seeking compensation under Deen Dayal Yojna. SUDEEPAK KUMAR 2026.05.05 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -2- The respondent has rejected her claim on the ground that application was filed beyond 90 days. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner su