In farmer accidental death welfare schemes, claims cannot be barred by limitation if delay results from revenue officials' negligence; benefits demand liberal interpretation and condonation to fulfill socio-economic aid purpose.

JUDGMENT :

Garima Prashad, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rajendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradeepta Kumar Shahi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking the following relief:-

“A. to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 16/12/2021 passed by respondent No.2 (Annexure-14 to this writ petition).

B. to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to pay the claim of the petitioner under “Mukhya Mantri Kishan Evam Sarvhit Beema Yojana” on the death of the husband of the petitioner.”

3. The State Government formulated a welfare scheme titled “Mukhyamantri Kisan Evam Sarvahit Bima Yojna” to provide financial assistance to the families of farmers in cases of death or permanent disability arising from contingencies specified under the Scheme. The Scheme has been in force for several years and has been revised from time to time through Government Orders, including those dated 10.07.2014, 20.06.2017 and 04.03.2020, which introduced amendments to its implementation and procedural framework.

4. The object of the Scheme is to provide immediate financial assistance to the family of a farmer who suffers accidental death or permanent disability so that the family may overcome the sudden economic distress caused by the loss of the earning member.

5. In the present case, the claim filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the impugned order dated 16.12.2021 solely on the ground that the claim had been filed beyond the period of limitation. The core controversy which arises for consideration is whether the claim of the petitioner under the Scheme was filed within the permissible period and whether the respondents were justified in rejecting the claim on the ground of limitation.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner’s husband, Ram Pravesh Yadav, a marginal farmer, had died on 06.09.2016 after being attacked by a buffalo. On the same day, the Panchayatnama was conducted and the postmortem was performed on 07.09.2016. The death certificate was issued by the Village Development Officer on 03.12.2016.

7. Learned counsel further submitted that, after completing the necessary formalities, the petitioner had submitted her claim under the Scheme before the concerned Lekhpal, Mahendra Ram, well within the prescribed period of four months. However, the said Lekhpal failed to forward the claim to the competent authorities.

8. Learned counsel further submitted that the said Lekhpal was transferred in April 2017 but failed to hand over the petitioner’s claim documents to the newly posted Lekhpal. The petitioner came to know of this only later and, after making considerable efforts to retrieve the documents from the earlier Lekhpal, eventually handed them over to the newly posted Lekhpal on 27.01.2018.

9. Thereafter, the concerned Lekhpal submitted his report before the Revenue Inspector and the Tahsildar, who forwarded the matter to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 14.03.2018. The claim was thereafter sent to the Chief Revenue Officer on 15.03.2018 and was thereafter rejected in the meeting of the Kisan Evam Sarvahit Bim