SIYA WATI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME DEPTT. U.P. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
WRIC/250/2025 · 2025-01-22
Manish Kumar, Rajan Roy
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 115006 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 115006 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No. 1 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Lucknow) ************ Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4099-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 250 of 2025 Petitioner :- Siya Wati Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jitendra Bahadur Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.
1. Heard Shri Jitendra Bahadur Singh, leaned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.
2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner claimant for compensation under the Mukhyamantri Kirshak Durghatna Kalayan Yojna has challenged the decision of the District Level Committee headed by the District Magistrate dated 30.05.2022 relating to the petitioner i.e. at Serial No. 107.
3. We have perused the said decision and all that has been said therein is as under:-
"nkok Hkqxrku gsrq vik=@vLohd`r fd;s tkus dh laLrqfr dh tkrh gSA"
4. This can hardly be said to be a decision determining the entitlement of the petitioner for compensation under the aforesaid scheme. Neither any fact is mentioned nor any reasons are given for arriving at the conclusion. It is merely a conclusion that too a cryptic one. Only for this reason we quash the impugned decision dated 30.05.2022 at Serial No. 107 so far as it relates to the petitioner.
Page No. 2
5. The District Magistrate, Lucknow should ensure that such decisions are not passed in future. The decision in such matters need not be a lengthy one but at least there should be consideration of relevant aspects and it should disclose due and proper application of mind to the claim of the petitioner in the light of the relevant Government Orders and the facts and evidence collected.
6. Let a fresh decision be taken in respect of the petitioner in the light of the aforesaid within a period of three months.
7. A copy of this order shall be communicated by Shri Raj Baksh Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel to the District Magistrate, Lucknow for compliance and also for being adhered in future.
8. The writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. . (Manish Kumar,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Order Date :- 22.1.2025 R.K.P. Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench