3 min readMohaliJul 5, 2026 09:30 AM IST
First published on: Jul 5, 2026 at 09:30 AM IST
Nearly nine months after her husband died while on duty, Shobha Devi is still waiting for the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) to release dependent benefits to her family, with fresh official queries delaying the claim despite an earlier finding that his death qualified as an employment injury.
A resident of Gobindganj in Bihar’s East Champaran district, Shobha’s husband, Ram Nath Paswan (Insurance No. 1214222305), was employed with M/s Ocean Support and Industrial Services in Mohali. He died during his night shift on October 23, 2025, and was declared “brought dead” at Civil Hospital, Mohali.
“My husband went to work but never returned home. It has been nine months, yet I have not received the benefits that our family is entitled to. Every time we hope for relief, another query is raised,” Shobha Devi told The Indian Express.
She said she sought legal help after receiving a June 18, 2026, letter from ESIC Assistant Director Harpal Singh stating that “stress due to routine cannot be treated as Employment Injury” and asking the employer to explain the reasons for stress, noting that Paswan had been working as a helper.
“I have now approached Advocate Jasbir Singh, who has agreed to fight my case without charging any fee. I only want justice for my husband’s death,” she said.
The latest query comes despite an investigation report prepared by the ESIC Branch Office, Mohali, on April 22, 2026, which found that Paswan was on duty from 10 pm to 6 am, fell ill around 11.40 pm, and died during the course of his employment. Based on witness statements, hospital records and the FIR, the branch office concluded that the “employment injury stands confirmed” and treated the death as an employment-related accident.
Advocate Jasbir Singh argued that the department’s latest query was inconsistent with the provisions of the law.
“Section 51-A of the ESI Act, 1948 presumes that any accident or death arising during the course of employment is an employment injury. The law does not require an employer to medically establish the cause of stress. That determination rests on medical evidence,” he said.
Questioning the department’s approach, he added, “The worker died during duty. Asking the employer to explain the reason for stress when he was employed as a helper is difficult to justify.”
When contacted, Assistant Director Harpal Singh said he was undergoing dialysis and was unable to comment on the matter.
Regional Director Deepak Malik said the corporation had sought information from the employer to establish a causal connection between the death and employment and would proceed in accordance with the law after receiving the required information.
He maintained that dependent benefits can be granted only after establishing a causal link between the injury and employment, adding that the employer had not responded despite being given an opportunity.
For Shobha Devi, however, the legal process has only prolonged her family’s hardship.
“I have lost my husband. All I am asking for is the support that the law promises to families like ours,” she said.
For Shobha Devi, however, the legal process has only prolonged her family’s hardship. (Express Photo) 
Share
