TEEJA DEVI vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CWP/15153/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 14 16 19 21 32 226. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 15-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010824292026

e-Filing Number

12-05-2026

Filing Number

CWP/29925/2026

Filing Date

13-May-2026

Registration No

CWP/15153/2026

Registration Date

13-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal

Coram

Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal

Category

63.63 - CASES RELATING TO ALL KINDS OF COMPENSATION ( 756 )

Judicial Branch

WRITS -I BRANCH

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 14 16 19 21 32 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.TEEJA DEVI

    Adv. JITENDER SHARMA

  2. 2.State of Haryana and Others

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.State of Haryana and Others

  3. 3.Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board (HSAMB) through its Chief Administrator

  4. 4.Secretary/Executive Officer, Market Committee

  5. 5.District Marketing Officer Bhiwani

  6. 6.Chief Executive Officer, Haryana Parivar Suruksha Nyas

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Jagmohan BansalView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of Teeja Devi's petition seeking Rs. 5 lakh compensation for her son's death by electrocution in an agricultural field. After the State counsel cited a precedent order from CWP-9253-2026, the State undertook to reconsider the petitioner's claim and redress her grievance within six weeks, which the petitioner's counsel accepted, leading to disposal of the case in terms of both parties' statements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CWP/15153/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of Teeja Devi's petition seeking Rs. 5 lakh compensation for her son's death by electrocution in an agricultural field. After the State counsel cited a precedent order from CWP-9253-2026, the State undertook to reconsider the petitioner's claim and redress her grievance within six weeks, which the petitioner's counsel accepted, leading to disposal of the case in terms of both parties' statements. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case