Disposed¶17

Mamta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2026WRIC/11829/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mukhyamantri Kisan Durghatna Kalyan Yojna; Bataidar; clause 2(3); claim rejection by District Magistrate Ambedkarnagar; deceased not land owner; writ certiorari and mandamus; Article 226; quashing of rejection order; fresh consideration with hearing; reasoned order within eight weeks; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; WRIT - C 11829 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 02/02/2024 quashed and set aside; authority concerned directed to grant the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and pass a reasoned order within eight weeks from date in accordance with law. ¶17

Mamta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 11829 of 2025

¶3

Mamta

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Petitioner(s) : K.K. Singh, Faizal Hashmi, Shobhit Kumar Rastogi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

¶6

Court No. - 3

¶7

HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

¶9

This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner has prayed for the following substantial relief(s):

¶10

"I). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 02/02/2024, issued from the office of the District, Magistrate, Ambedkarnagar, passed by O.P. No.2, by which he has rejected the claim of the petitioner under " Mukhyamantri Kisan Durghatna Kalyan Yojna". (Contained in Annexure No. 1).

¶11

II). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to reconsider and decide the petitioner's claim under the said scheme afresh, in accordance with law, by treating the claim within time and by granting the admissible benefits under the " Mukhyamantri Kisan Durghatna Kalyan Yojna".

¶12

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has provided the order passed by the authority concerned dated 02.02.2024. The reason provided in the said order is that the deceased was not a land owner and, therefore, the claim of the petitioner under the Mukhyamantri Kisan Durghatna Kalyan Yojna was rejected.

¶13

We are of the view that the authority should have considered the claim of the petitioner that the deceased was the Bataidar and would fall under clause 2(3) of Mukhyamantri Kisan Durghatna Kalyan Yojna.

¶14

WRIC No. 11829 of 2025

¶15

¶16

In light of the same, the impugned order is quashed and set aside with a direction upon the authority concerned to grant opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass a reasoned order within a period of eight weeks from date in accordance with law.

¶17

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶18

January 6, 2026 Satish

¶19

(Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mamta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mamta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharmpal Singh Yadav and 2 Others vs National Highway Authority India Thru. Chairman New Delhi and 5 Others

Mohammad Aftab vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Social Welfare Deptt. Lko. and 5 Others

Gurpreet Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Mini. of Transport Lko and Another

Ajeej Urf Nanke vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Veer Bahadur Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl.Chief Secy. Deptt. of Housing and Urban Planning Lko. and 5 Others

Kamal Naraian vs U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Ministry of External Affairs New Delhi and 3 Others