Allahabad High Court
WRIC/11805/2025 of NAGESHWARI DEVI Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF REVENUE, LKO. AND OTHERS on 10 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11805 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. The petitioner had filed an application in the year 2022 with regard to a claim for payment under
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - C No. - 11805 of 2025
Court No. - 3
HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J.
HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, 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. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. The petitioner had filed an application in the year 2022 with regard to a claim for payment under Mukhyamantri Krashak Durghatana Kalyan Yojana. However, no response was forthcoming from the respondent-authorities and it is only on 10.06.2025 that an order of the Tehsil was provided to the petitioner which indicated that the petitioner did not own land in his own name and was not a registered bataidar, and accordingly, his claim was not tenable.
3. It is to be noted that even in spite of this report, no order has been passed on the claim filed by the petitioner.
4. Ms. Madima Trivedi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the petitioner was a farmer and would occasionally do odd jobs. Counsel submits that the petitioner was regularly working in the field of his father whose name is registered in the khatauni and who owned farm land. She further submits that the petitioner was the main bread winner of the family and the case of the petitioner is clearly covered under Clause-2(2) of the above scheme.
5. In light of the above, we direct the authority concerned to once again examine the case of the petitioner, grant an opportunity of hearing to the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Akhil Bajpai, Abhishek Agnihotri, Akshay Singh, Madima Trivedi, Sandeep Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Nageshwari Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue, Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s)
petitioner and thereafter pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from date. The authority concerned should take into consideration the judgment passed by this Court in Writ-C No.10057 of 2025 (Sangeeta Vs. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. & others) while passing its decision.
6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
December 10, 2025 Anand/- WRIC No. 11805 of 2025 2 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench