HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 24231 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J. HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondent. 2. The petitioner made claim for compensation under Mukhyamantri Krishak Durghatna Kalyan Yojana, upon death of his son Sanjeet Kumar, aged 20 years on 23.5.2024 in a road accident. In support of his claim the petitioner has filed an affidavit stating that he is having agricultural land being Gata no.97, area about 3.213 hectare situated at Village Nahra, Pargana and Tehsil Rajapur, District Chitrakoot and on account of his old age, he was not cultivating his field, and the said work was done by his deceased son. The claim has been rejected by the impugned order dated 30.06.2025 recording the following findings:- " The Gram Pradhan and villagers, in their statement dated 13.06.2025, stated that at the time of his death the deceased was aged about 20 years and was unmarried and he usually stayed at home assisting his father in agricultural work but no agricultural work was being done separately by the deceased over the agricultural land belonging to his father." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the definition of 'agriculturist' given in Government Order dated 28.02.2020 (paragraph 2), according to which any member of family of a person recorded as Khatedar/ Sah-Khatedar and whose main source of livelihood was the income from agricultural land would be covered. He further submits that in view of the affidavit filed by the petitioner stating that his son was cultivating the agricultural land belonging to him, the claim should have been accepted. 4. We have gone through the scheme, and we find that under paragraph No.2 of the scheme any member of the family of Khatedar/ Sahkhatedar whose main source of livelihood is income from agricultural land is duly covered Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Pandey, Jaideep Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Narvada .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) under the definition of 'agriculturalist'. It is noteworthy that even a landless person who is cultivating field of some other person on batai is entitled to benefit of the scheme. In view of affidavit of the petitioner that his deceased son was cultivating the agricultural land belonging to him, he would be covered under the scheme. 5. As such, the impugned order dated 30.06.2025 is found to be unsustainable in law and is accordingly quashed. The matter is remitted back for fresh consideration of the claim of the petitioner on merits within six weeks' from the date of communication of the instant order. 6. The writ petition stands disposed of. October 7, 2025 Nitendra WRIC No. 24231 of 2025 2 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- NITENDRA TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad