Allahabad High Court
/12038/2025 of SANGEETA DEVI Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU.ITS PRIN. SECY. REVENUE DEPTT. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS on 12 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 12038 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State Respondents and Sri Rajesh Kumar, Advocate who has filed his
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - C No. - 12038 of 2025
Court No. - 2
HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J.
HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State Respondents and Sri Rajesh Kumar, Advocate who has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent no.3, which is taken on record.
2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding and directing the opposite party no.3 to release the claim under the scheme of Mukhyamantri Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti ke baypari Aadhti Durghatna Sahayta Yozna in favor of the petitioner.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby commanding and directing the Secretary, Agriculture Production Market, Committee, Naveen Mandi, Safdar Ganj, District- Barabanki, (opposite party no.3) to pay the penal interest from the date of filing of the claim, in the interest of justice."
3. It is the case of the petitioner that after the death of her husband, she had applied for claim under the Mukhyamantri Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Ke Baypari Aadhti Durghatna Sahayta Yojana. Till date the claim has not been processed.
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the opposite party no.3 Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vivek Chandra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sangeeta Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru.Its Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
that the petitioner's husband died on 10.03.2019, and initially the claim was not maintainable under the old scheme, however, after the new scheme came into operation on 26.09.2019 even persons having died due to snake bite are covered under the scheme.
5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.3 to look into the grievance of the petitioner regarding her claim having been undecided till date and pass an appropriate order taking into account the provisions of the new scheme floated on 26.09.2019 within a period of two months from the date a copy of this order is produced before him. December 12, 2025 Darpan Sharma WRIC No. 12038 of 2025 2 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- DARPAN SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- DARPAN SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench