Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 165186 (ALL)

VIMLA DEVI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU.THE PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/9136/2025 · 2025-09-19

Manjive Shukla, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9136 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Bahadur Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The captioned writ petition has been filed by the petitioner inter alia praying therein for the following reliefs:- "(i) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent no.2 (District Magistrate, District Amethi) to consider and take appropriate decision upon the application of the petitioner moved under the "Krishak Durghatna Kalyan Yojna" in accordance with law at any early date in terms of the letter dated 18.3.2025 written by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil Musafirkhana, District Amethi (Annexure No.7 to this writ petition). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing to the respondents to pay the amount of insurance of Rs.5 lakhs to the petitioner payable under the Scheme "Mukhya Mantri Krishak Durghatna Kalyan Yojna" as the husband of the petitioner (namely late Dhananjay Singh) had died in Road Accident." 3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondets at the very outset has submitted that the claim of the petitioner is under active consideration at the level of District Magistrate, Amethi. He further submits that in respect of clarification on a particular point, D.M., Amethi has written a letter on 01.08.2025 to the State Government seeking Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anil Kumar Mishra, Arun Chand Pandey, Ram Bahadur Maurya Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Vimla Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru.The Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) necessary guidance and as soon as the said clarification/guidance is provided by the State Government, decision would be taken in the matter of the petitioner. 4. Learned Standing Counsel has further submitted that in all probability the decision would be taken within a period of two months. 5. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent, this writ petition is finally disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Amethi to consider and decide petitioner's claim by passing speaking and reasoned order with in a period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. 6. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner. September 19, 2025 Anurag WRIC No. 9136 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench