Court No. - 3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 32244 of 2022

Petitioner :- Ruby Mathur And Another

Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Rahul Mehrotra

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Satyam Singh,Siddharth

Singhal,Udai Shanker Mishra

Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing

Counsel for the State respondent, Sri Satyam Singh, learned

counsel for the respondent no. 2 and Sri Udai Shanker Mishra,

learned counsel for the respondent no. 3.

None appears for the respondent no. 4 although name of counsel is

shown in the cause list.

Petitioners' brother, namely Sri Yogendra Kumar, was working as

Assistant in District Co-operative Bank Ltd., Nidhauli Kalan

Branch, District Etah. He died in the road accident on 30.09.2018.

It has been stated in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the writ petition that the

petitioners' brother was insured under the U.P. State Employee

Group Insurance Scheme under Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti

Beema Yojna (PMJJBY) by Life Insurance Corporation of India

Ltd. and Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Beema Yojna (PMSBY) by the

respondent no. 4. It has been further stated that the petitioner no. 1

was made nominee in Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Beema Yojna

(PMJJBY) and petitioner no. 2 was made nominee in Pradhan

Mantri Suraksha Beema Yojna (PMSBY).

Grievance of the petitioners is that despite claim made by the

petitioners as nominee on 10.04.2019 by submitting claim forms to

respondent no. 2, claim amount has not been paid by the

respondents nos. 3 and 4.

Sri Satyam Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 states

that Insurance Premium was duly deducted from the salary of the

deceased employee and it was remitted to the Insurance Company.

He further states that claim forms of the petitioners were

forwarded by the respondent no. 2 to the respective insurance

companies/respondent nos. 3 and 4 on 15.04.2019 after following

due procedure.

Learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 states that since the

respondent no. 2 has not paid insurance premium amount,

therefore, no decision could be taken by the respondent no. 3.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the

respondent nos. 3 and 4 to take appropriate decision on insurance

claim of the petitioners, after affording them as well as to the

respondent no. 2, a reasonable opportunity of hearing and after

well examining the records. The respondent no. 2 is directed to

fully cooperate and disclose all information as may be required by

the respondent nos. 3 & 4. The decision shall be taken by the

respondent nos. 3 & 4 within a period of one month from the date

of submission of certified copy of this order before them.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the

merits of the case of the petitioner.

Order Date :- 7.2.2023

Shubham Arya

Digitally signed by :-

SHUBHAM ARYA

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad