RAJ BALA vs UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** 150 CWP-16619-2026 Date of Decision: 25.05.2026 RAJ BALA ...Petitioner Vs. UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS …Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present:- Mr. Sunil K. Tandon, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Akshay Kumar Dahiya, Advocate for respondent *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent to pay her compensation on account of death of her son by electrocution. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner’s claim is squarely covered by order dated 06.05.2026 passed by this Court in a bunch of petitions including CWP-14011-2026 titled as ‘Phulpati Vs. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and Ors.’ 3. Learned counsel for respondent does not dispute aforesaid statement. 4. In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition stands disposed of in terms of Phulpati (supra). 5. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE May 25, 2026 Deepak DPA Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No DEEPAK BISSYAN 2026.05.25 16:16 Whether Reportabl