Hon’ble Saral Srivastava, J.—Heard Sri M.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3, Sri R.K. Gupta, learned counsel on behalf of the respondent No. 4 and Sri Mohit Shukla holding brief of Sri Tarun Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5.

2. The brief facts given arise to the present petition are that petitioner’s husband Gajendra Pal Singh was working as Senior Clerk in Government Girls Inter College Hathras (Mahamaya Nagar) and was sent on election duty as Presiding/Election Officer in the Panchayat Election of the year 2005 which was held on 20.8.2005. Gajendra Pal Singh was travelling with polling party by Bus No. U.P. 81 N-9767 to reach polling booth but he denied on the way to polling booth. An F.I.R. with regard to the death of the Gajendra Pal Singh was lodged at Police Station Hathras and the post-mortem was also conducted, which disclosed the cause of death was heart disease. It transpires from the record that there was Personal Accident Insurance Policy (Group) issued by The New India Assurance Company covering the risk of the employees deputed by the Government of Uttar Pradesh for election duty. In both phases of Panchayat Elections of the year 2005 for the period between 16.8.2005 to 29.8.2005 the liability of The New India Assurance Company (hereinafter referred to Insurance Company) was subject to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. The relevant clause of the policy is extracted herein under:

“NOW THIS POLICY WITNESSTH that subject to and in consideration of the payment made to the Company the premiums for the period stated in the schedule or for any further period for which the company may accept payment for the renewal of this policy and subject to the terms provisions, exceptions and conditions herein expressed or contained or hereon endorsed, the company shall pay the INSURED to the extended & manner hereinafter provided that if any of the insured persons shall.

Sustain any bodily injury resulting solely and directly from accident caused by external, violent and visible means, the sum hereinafter set forth in respect of any of the insured persons specified in the schedule.

3. It appears that since the husband of the petitioner Gajendra Pal Singh died during election duty, petitioner being wife of Gajendra Pal Singh submitted a claim under the Insurance policy (hereinafter referred to Insurance Company) before the respondent No. 4 on 12.12.2005. The claim of the petitioner was rejected by respondent No. 4 vide order dated 22.12.2005 on the ground that policy covered the risk of death only if it had been caused by any bodily injury resulting solely and directly from accident caused by external, violent and visible means. It further transpires from record that the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 22.12.2005 approached the Lokayukt, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, who also rejected the claim of the petitioner as not maintainable vide order dated 16.9.2008.

4. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 22.12.2005 passed by the Branch Manager of the Company and the order dated 16.9.2008 passed by Secretary, Lokayukt. Petitioner has preferred the present writ petition for quashing the aforesaid orders and also sought a writ of mandamus, directing the Insurance company to pay Insurance claim to the petitioner with interest.

5. The respondent No. 4 filed a counter-affidavit stating therein that the husband of the petitioner did not sustain bodily injury resulting solely and directly from accident caused by external, violent and visible means. The Insurance company pleaded that the petitioner’s husband died due to heart failure, while on his way to perform election duty and the death of the husband of the petitioner would fall in the category of natural death and not accidental death. In this regard he has placed reliance upon the terms and conditions of the policy extracted herein above. Thus, he submits that the