Allowed

Divya Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru Its Additional Chief Secy. (Revenue) Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC3 Mar 2023/1884/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge set aside the District Magistrate's rejection of a compensation claim under the Chief Minister Farmer Accident Welfare Scheme, 2020, holding that the limitation period must be excluded due to the delay caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; matter remanded for fresh consideration treating the application as filed within the limitation period.

Divya Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Its… — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1884 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Divya Singh And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Its Additional Chief Secy. (Revenue) Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravi Pratap Singh,Akanksha Shukla,Amitabh Pratap Singh

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

The order dated July 27, 2021 passed by the District Magistrate, Lucknow has been impugned in the present writ petition.

¶7

Vide aforesaid order, the claim of the petitioner for payment of compensation on account of death of his son under the Chief Minister Farmer Accident Welfare Scheme, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Scheme') was rejected on the ground that the application was filed beyond the time provided for in the Scheme.

¶8

It is claimed that the son of the petitioner died on May 27, 2021 on account of road accident. The application was filed for payment of compensation in terms of the Scheme. However, the same was rejected vide impugned order dated July 27, 2021 on the ground that it was filed beyond the maximum period of 75 days provided for filing such application.

¶9

We find the impugned order to be totally illegal if considered in the light of the order dated January 10, 2022 passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Misc. Application No.21 of 2022 filed in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 (In Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation) and the order of this Court dated January 11, 2022 passed in Public Interest Litigation (PIL) No.564 of 2020 in terms of which period from March 15, 2020 till February 28, 2022 was directed to be excluded for computing the period of limitation provided under the Statutes. In the case in hand, the Scheme provides for maximum period of 75 days for filing any application. However, the fact remains that the period of delay on account of Covid-19 pandemic in filing application by the petitioner claiming compensation has to be excluded for calculation of limitation.

¶10

Considering the aforesaid facts, the impugned order passed by the authority concerned deserves to be set aside.

¶11

Ordered accordingly.

¶12

The matter is remanded back for fresh consideration treating the application of the petitioner to have been filed within the period of limitation provided under the Scheme.

¶13

( Subhash Vidyarthi, J. ) ( Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J. )

¶14

Order Date :- 3.3.2023 A.Nigam

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Divya Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru Its Additional Chief Secy. (Revenue) Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divya Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru Its Additional Chief Secy. (Revenue) Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mishri Lal Vs Union of India through Chairman Railway and 2 Ors.

Ram Sanehi Adult and 8 Others Vs Union of India through General Manager N.E.R.and 2 Others

Swaminath Pandey Inre W.P.NO.3006SS2000 Vs Ram Lal and 4 Others

Indrawati Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Others

Moti Lal Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/Prin. Secy. Deptt. Secondary Education Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Om Prakash Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Urban Development Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko. and Others