HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 8496 of 2021 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard Mr. Gaurav Chandra Kashyap, learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 15.01.2020 whereby petitioner's representation for enhancement of compensatory/ex gratia amount in lieu of death of her husband in service has been rejected. 3. It has been submitted that husband of petitioner late Munshi Lal was posted as Head Constable with the police and passed away in service on 04.01.2004 with the First Information Report also being lodged with regard to same as Case Crime No. 2 of 2004 under Sections 394/307 I.P.C. at Police Station Hasanganj, Lucknow. It is submitted that as per contents of F.I.R petitioner's husband died due to unidentified persons opening fire upon him and due to injuries suffered thereafter. It is submitted that upon the death of her husband, petitioner was granted ex gratia compensatory amount of Rs.30,000/- in terms of Government Orders prevalent. Learned Counsel has however drawn attention to the Government Order dated 20.01.2003 to submit that the amount of ex gratia to be paid in such circumstances was enhanced to Rs.5,00,000/- for incidents of death of police personnel during service taking place subsequent to 09.11.2001. It is therefore submitted that since petitioner's husband passed away subsequent to the aforesaid cut off date, petitioner was entitled to ex gratia amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and not Rs.30,000/-. 4. Learned counsel has also drawn attention to the letter dated 23.01.2004 appended as Annexure - 14 to the writ petition to submit that the list annexed to the said letter clearly indicates the name of Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Virendra Singh, Anamika Shukla, Ganga Prasad Mishra, Gaurav Chandra Kashyap, Rajiv Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Smt. Munni Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P.Thru.Prin.Secy. Home And Anr. .....Respondent(s) petitioner's husband at Sl. No. 356 as a 'martyr' during service. It is therefore submitted that since petitioner is fully covered by Government Order dated 20.01.2003, ex gratia payment is required to be enhanced. 5. Learned State Counsel, on the basis of counter affidavit, has refuted the submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with submission that with regard to such circumstances, the State Government issued orders dated 06.02.1991 & 20.01.2003 for grant of ex gratia compensation for dependents of such police personnel who passed away in service and came within the classes and conditions indicated in the Government Order dated 20.01.2003. It is submitted that Government Order clearly prescribed two categories : the first category being of such police personnel who passed away, as a result of five conditions indicated in paragraph 4 while in other cases, conditions of paragraph 6 would be applicable. 6. It is therefore submitted that since petitioner's husband passed away on account of miscreants opening fire on him he would not come within the categories indicated in paragraph 4(1) to (5) due to which only an amount of Rs.30,000/- is required to be paid. 7. Learned counsel has also adverted to paragraph - 3 of Government Order dated 06.02.1991 as well as paragraph - 7 of Government Order dated 20.01.2003 to submit that in the second category of cases, where a police personnel passes away only on account of the fact that he was in service only an amount of Rs.30,000/- is payable. 8. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is thus admitted that petitioner's late husband passed away while in service. The only question requiring determination is whether petitioner's late husband came within categories 1 to 5 of paragraph 4 or under category indicated in paragraph - 6 of the Government Order dated 20.01.2003. 7. With regard to aforesaid aspect, it is relevant factum that exceptions have clearly been indicated in paragraph - 6 of the Government Order dated 20.01.2003 with illustrations also being indicated. For persons coming within category of enhanced compensatory amount, same are clearly indicated in paragraph - 4 of the Government Order. It is admitted case of opposite parties that petitioner's late husband passed away as a result of being fired upon by some miscreants. Although the said fact has been refuted by learned counsel for petitioner to submit that petitioner's late husband WRIA No. 8496 of 2021 2 passed away as a result of encounter with criminals, nonetheless it is evident that the petitioner's husband would not come within the categories indicated in paragraph - 6 of the Government Order dated 20.01.2003. 8. For the aforesaid purpose, relevant provisions of Government Order dated 20.01.2003 are reproduced as follows:- "4-शासनादेश संćया : 3239 पी/ छः-पु-6-90-1744/ 90, िदनांक : 06-02-1991 मȅ उन पुिलस किमयȋ के पिरवारȋ के िलए अनुŎह धनरािश अनुमęय की गयी है, जो पुिलस कमी िवशेष जोिखम भरे कायă करते समय िविशǸ वीरता, अदĞय साहस एवं कौशल का Šदशăन करने के फलĥवɴप वीरगित (मृĕयु) को ŠाĚत हȋगे। इस शासनादेश मȅ ऐसे अवसर/पिरĥथितयाँ िनĞनानुसार िनधाăिरत की गयी है- (1) डकै तȋ एवं बदमाशȋ से मुठभेí के समयः। (2) आंतकवादी तĕवȋ से मुठभेí के समय। (3) िवदेशी आŌमणकािरयȋ से संघषă के समय। (4) िहसाĕमक भीí को िनयंिśत करना एवं िततर िवतर करते समय। (5) दैवी आपदाɛ जैसे बाî-भू-ĥखलन, िहम ĥखलन, भूकĞम इĕयािद मȅ सेवा करते समय तथा अęय आपातकाल यथा आग बुझाते समय अथवा जीवन रWा करते समय । 5. तɭपराęत शासनादेश संćया : 4343 पी/छ:-पु-6-99-1998/99, िदनांक : 03-12-1999, शासनादेश संćया:2624पी/छः-पु0-6-2000-1198/999, िदनांक: 29-11-2000, शासनादेश संćया: 3382 पी/छः-पु0-6-2001/1198/99, िदनांक: 9-11-2001 मȅ िविभęन ũेिणयȋ मȅ अनुमęय रािशयȋ मȅ वृिǪ की गयी है। उǘ शासनादेशȋ के अनुसार घटना के िदनांक एवं वषă के अनुसार िनĞनानुसार धनरािश देय होगी :- ũेणी िद० 06-02-91 से 2- 12-99 के मĘय की घटना GO3239- P/CHHA-PU-6- 90-1744/90, dt 6- 2-91 िद० 03-12-99 से 28-11- 2000 के मĘय की घटना GO4343- P/CHHA- PU-6-99- 1198/99, dt 3-12-99 िद० 29-11- 2000 से 8-11- 01 के मĘय की घटना GO2624- P/CHHA- PU-6-2000- 1198/99, dt 29-11-2000 िद० 09-11-01 के बाद की घटना GO33 82-P/CH HA-PU-6- 2001/1198/99, dt 9-11-01 ũेणी-1 1,00,000/- 2,00,000/- 2,50,000/- 5,00,000/- ũेणी-2 80,000/- 1,60,000/- 2,50,000/- 5,00,000/- WRIA No. 8496 of 2021 3 ũेणी-3 60,000/- 1,20,000/- 2,50,000/- 5,00,000/- ũेणी-4 40,000/- 80,000/- 2,50,000/- 5,00,000/- 6-सिŌय सेवा करते समय मृĕयु अथवा कतăDz पालन के दौरान घायल होनेके Šकरणȋ मȅ अनुŎह धनरािश, शासनादेश संćया : सा-3-1340/दस-88-916/88 िदनांक 19-8-1988 के अनुɴप देय होगी, िजसमȅ सिŌय सेवा करते समय मृĕयु के िनĞनिलिखत उदाहरण िदये गये हȈ:- (1) Ŗैिफक िनयंśण करते समय िकसी गाíी की चपेट मȅ आने की िĥथित मȅ। (2) मोटरगाíी चलाते समय वषाăकाल मȅ पिहया िफसलने के कारण चालक की मृĕयु। (3) लेिवल Ōािसग पर िबना रोशनी की रेलगाíी से टकराने के कारण मृĕयु। (4) ŠिशWण देते समय ŠिशWाथȃ की चूक से गोली/िŎनेड चल जाने से ŠिशWाथȃ की मृĕयु। 7- इस शासनादेश के अनुɴप सिŌय सेवा करते समय मृĕयु तथा कतăDzपालन के दौरान घायल होने की िĥथित मȅ अनुŎह धनरािश िनĞनानुसार अनुमęय की गयी है :-. ũेणी सिŌय सेवा करते समय मृĕयु की िĥथित मȅ अनुमęय धनरािश कतăDz पालन के दौरान घायल होने की िĥथित मȅ अनुमęय अनुŎह धनरािश ũेणी 1 50,000/- 5,000/- ũेणी 2 40,000/- 5,000/- ũेणी 3 30,000/- 5,000/- ũेणी 4 20,000/- 5,000/- " 9. Once it is admitted that petitioner has been granted ex gratia payment in terms of aforesaid Government Order of 1991 as revised by the Government Order of 20.01.2003, revision of such rates is indicated in paragraph - 5 of the Government Order. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussion which has been made, it being apparent that death of late husband of petitioner would be included in paragraph - 4 of the Government Order dated 20.01.20023 and does not come within illustrations indicated in paragraph - 6 thereof, in the considered opinion of this Court, petitioner was entitled to the WRIA No. 8496 of 2021 4 enhanced amount of said ex gratia as indicated in paragraph - 5 thereof, particularly since admittedly petitioner's late husband passed away subsequent to 09.11.2001. 11. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, impugned order dated 15.01.2020, notwithstanding scrutiny of this Court, is hereby quashed by issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari. A further Writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding opposite party No.2 or any other competent authority is issued to ensure payment of enhanced compensatory amount to petitioner amounting to Rs.5,00,000/- after deducting the amount already paid. Such a payment shall be ensured to petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon the authority. On the settled proposition of restitution as has been held in the case of State of Uttarakhand v. Sarita Singh and others [2025 SCC OnLine SC 640], opposite parties shall also ensure payment of interest to petitioner @ 6% per annum from the date it was due till the date of actual payment. The said amount shall also be paid within said of four weeks. 12. Resultantly, petition succeeds and is allowed. Parties to bear their own costs. October 31, 2025 lakshman WRIA No. 8496 of 2021 5 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAKSHMANA KUMAR TAMMANA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench