Rajasthan High Court
Ghooghalla vs Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Ors ... on 3 April, 2024
Author: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
[2024:RJ-JP:15641]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4592/2013
Ghooghalla (Deceased)
1/1. Smt. Sameena W/o late Ghooghalla, Aged 57 years, R/o
Village & Post Nawali, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
1/2. Rahman S/o late Ghooghalla, Aged 22years, R/o Village &
Post Nawali, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
1/3. Shahrukh Khan S/o late Ghooghalla, Aged 20years, R/o
Village & Post Nawali, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
1/4. Kumari Shahina D/o late Ghooghalla (Minor), Aged 17
years, R/o Village & Post Nawali, Tehsil Bayana, District
Bharatpur (Raj.) through natural guardina (Mother) Smt.
Sameena
1/5. Fharukh Khan S/o late Ghooghalla (Minor), Aged 15 years,
R/o Village & Post Nawali, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur
(Raj.) through natural guardina (Mother) Smt. Sameena
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Bayana, District Bharatpur, Rajasthan
through Its Secretary
2. The Chairman Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti Bayana, District
Bharatpur, Rajasthan
3. District Collector, Bharatpur, Rajasthan
4. Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) Bayana, District Bharatpur,
Rajasthan
5. Deputy Director, Government Insurance & Consolidated Funds
Department, Bharatpur, Rajasthan
6. Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station Bayana, District
Bharatpu
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.C. Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG Ms. Manju Joshi, AGC Mr. Pankaj Choudhary for Mr. Rohit Choudhary, Dy.G.C. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Judgment / Order (Downloaded on 03/04/2024 at 08:52:14 PM) [2024:RJ-JP:15641] (2 of 2) [CW-4592/2013] 03/04/2024 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his claim for compensation on account of death of his son from snake bite was rejected only on account of non-availability of Forensic Science Laboratory report (for brevity "the FSL report"). He submits that subsequently, the FSL report has been made available and in view thereof, the matter may be remanded back to the respondents for decision afresh taking into consideration the FSL report and other evidence.
Learned counsels for the respondents have no objection to the aforesaid prayer.
In view thereof, the order impugned dated 26.03.2012 passed by the respondents rejecting the claim of the petitioner on account of non-availability of the FSL report is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to them for considering afresh in light of the FSL report and other material on record within a period of three months from the date of communication of this order.
The civil writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J Manish/131 (Downloaded on 03/04/2024 at 08:52:15 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)