Dismissed

Nirmla v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Jan 2020WRIC/1078/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking compensation under the Uttar Pradesh Mukhyamantri Kisan Evam Sarvhit Bima Yojana for the death of the petitioner's husband in a road accident, the High Court dismissed the case without addressing merits but directed a respondent authority to decide the pending application within two months by a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to decide the pending compensation application within two months by a speaking and reasoned order.

Nirmla Vs State of U.P. and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1078 of 2020 Petitioner :- Nirmla Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Vidya Kant Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶4

This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

¶5

"(I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents paid the compensation of Rs.5 lacs under Kisan Servahit Bima Yojana.

¶6

(II) Issue a writ, order or direction in like nature which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, under the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶7

(III) Award costs of the writ petition to the petitioner. "

¶8

It appears from perusal of the averments made in the writ petition that the petitioner is a housewife and was dependent upon her late husband Raj Kumar, who was a farmer who lost his life in a road accident. She moved an application/representation for being awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.5 lacs before respondent No.2 under the scheme of Uttar Pradesh Mukhyamantri Kisan Evam Sarvhit Bima Yojana on 01.11.2018 (Annexure No.2 to the writ petition) but the said application has not been decided till date. It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that a suitable direction may be issued to respondent No.2 to decide the application/representation filed by the petitioner before him (Annexure No.2 to the writ petition) for grant of compensation for the death of petitioner's husband in a road accident within a specified period.

¶9

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction to respondent No.2 to decide the application/ representation dated 01.11.2018 (Annexure No.2 to the writ petition) filed by the petitioner before him under the scheme of Uttar Pradesh Mukhyamantri Kisan Evam Sarvhit Bima Yojana strictly in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶10

Order Date :- 14.1.2020 SFH

Nirmla v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmla v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishna Nand Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lachhi Ram Dharmshala Public Trust Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gurjent Singh Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Sri Ram Narain Agarwal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Devi Shankar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Jamil Ahmad Shah Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others