PUSHPA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. CHIEF SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/7189/2025 · 2025-07-29
Rajan Roy, Saurabh Lavania
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 153554 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 153554 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43745-DB Court No. - 2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 7189 of 2025 Petitioner :- Pushpa Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Chief Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Durgesh Mishra,Abhishek Shukla,Manvendra Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Heard.
2. By means of this writ petition, the following relief has been sought :-
"I. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Opposite Parties particularly Opposite Party No. 3 and 4 to pay the compensation to the petitioner for the death of deceased son under the State Disaster response fund i.e. Rs. 4,00,000/- on account of accidental death by Vanroj (Neelgai), within a stipulated period of time, Annexure No. 1, in the interest of justice.."
3. The Standing Counsel has instructions from the Tehsildar and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil- Lambhua, District- Sultanpur, that the claim of the petitioner for compensation under the State Disaster Response Fund has not been accepted on the ground that requisite material in support of it was not provided by the petitioner, however, the petitioner's counsel relies upon Annexure no.5, which are reports of the revenue authorities supporting the claim of the petitioner.
4. Let the District Magistrate, Sultanpur look into the matter specially the veracity of the documents annexed at Annexure No.5 and if it is found that reports of revenue authorities etc. were in favour of the petitioner then a considered decision shall be taken, however, if in that process it is found that the son of the petitioner being resident of District-Pratapgarh, the compensation is to be paid or decision is to be taken based on the material collected at Sultanpur by the authorities at Pratapgarh then he should transmit the matter to the District Magistrate Pratapgarh, who shall ensure a speedy decision in the matter. However, if he finds that decision can be taken at Sultanpur and compensation can be paid there then he shall do needful in the matter. In either eventuality, the proceedings shall be completed and the decision shall be communicated to the petitioner within two months.
4. The petition stands disposed of. [Saurabh Lavania,J.] [Rajan Roy,J.] Order Date :- 29.7.2025 Jyoti/- Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench