Laxmin Debi vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 3363 Jhar

                                      1

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        W.P.(C) No. 4610 of 2021
                                    ---

      Laxmin Debi                              ...     ...     Petitioner
                                      Versus
      1. The State of Jharkhand

2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

3. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

4. The Deputy Commissioner, Gumla

5. The Superintendent of Police, Gumla .... ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Awanish Shekhar, A.C. to A.A.G.-I Order No. 05 Dated: 24.08.2022

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the concerned respondents to take immediate steps for payment of adequate compensation to the petitioner as her husband- Ashok Singh was allegedly murdered by extremists on 18.03.2007.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to murder of petitioner's husband, she represented the Deputy Commissioner, Gumla (the respondent no. 4) for providing her employment on compassionate ground, however the same was not responded. She also represented various authorities seeking compensation under applicable policy of the state government, however the same remained unresponded which has compelled her to prefer the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the petitioner's claim, puts reliance on a judgment rendered by a Bench of this Court in W.P.(S) No.5040 of 2014 (Rekha Devi Vs. The Union of India & Ors.) With W.P.(S) No. 5228 of 2016 (Asha Devi Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.)

3. Mr. Awanish Shekhar, learned A.C. to A.A.G.-I appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that the present writ petition has been filed much belatedly. Moreover, the petitioner has also not explained in the writ petition as to under which policy, she has claimed compensation on account of alleged murder of her husband by extremists.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty

to file a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 4. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 4, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner/her representative, shall take an appropriate informed decision in accordance with law/applicable policy of the state government within six weeks from the date of filing of the said representation.

5. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Ritesh/