Allahabad High Court
SMT BHAWAR KALIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The unreasoned order was quashed as it violated natural justice, and a fresh reasoned order must be issued.
Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Bhawar Kali, sought a compensation of Rs.5,00,000 under the Mukhyamantri Krishak Durghatna Kalyan Yojna, 2020 for the death of her son, Ram Kumar. The District Magistrate, Baghpat, rejected the claim with a terse order in Hindi that provided no reasons. The court held that any administrative order affecting civil rights must contain at least a brief reasoning, as a facet of natural justice. Since the impugned order was wholly unreasoned, it was deemed violative of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, the order dated 12.02.2026 was quashed, and the authorities were directed to pass a fresh, reasoned order within two weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the District Magistrate's order rejecting the compensation claim, without any reasons, violates the principles of natural justice.
- Whether an unreasoned administrative order affecting civil rights can be sustained.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a fresh, reasoned decision on the compensation claim.
Subjects
- compensation
- administrative law
- natural justice
- reasoned order
- Mukhyamantri Krishak Durghatna Kalyan Yojna
- writ petition
- district magistrate
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 39356 of 2026
Smt Bhawar Kali
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Shams Uz Zaman
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.
Court No. - 2
HON'BLE J.J. MUNIR, J.
HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.
The petitioner's claim for grant of compensation under the Mukhyamantri
Krishak Durghatna Kalyan Yojna, 2020 claiming compensation in the
sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of the death of one Ram Kumar, the
petitioner's son has been rejected by the District Magistrate, Baghpat in
terms of the following order :
"समिति द्वार उक्त अवेदन निरस्त किया जाता है I"
When we required Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned Additional Chief Standing
Counsel to defend this order, which is utterly laconic and cryptic, he
accepted the fact that the order is indeed one that carries no reason. He
waived his opportunity to file a counter affidavit. We, therefore, proceed
to judgement.
It is to be remembered that any order made by an Authority, even an
administrative authority, which has civil consequences must furnish some
reasons for the conclusions reached, howsoever brief. The impugned
order does not carry the slightest of reasons. It is also to be borne in mind
that furnishing of reasons for the decision by an Authority that
pronounces upon rights of parties is also a facet of natural justice so that
the parties, whose rights are decided know why precisely their case has
been accepted, refused, partly accepted or partly refused. The impugned
order fails to pass the aforesaid test of an order deciding rights of parties
in a matter like the present one.
WRIC No. 39356 of 2026
2
Accordingly, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned
order dated 12.02.2026, including the decision of the committee on which
it is founded, is hereby quashed. The committee concerned and the
District Magistrate shall take a fresh decision in the matter within two
weeks by a reasoned order and communicate the order made to the
petitioner by speed post.
Let this order be communicated to the District Magistrate, Baghpat by the
Registrar (Compliance) through the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Baghpat within 24 hours.
(Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (J.J. Munir,J.)
September 29, 2026
S.P.
Digitally signed by :-
SANJAY PURI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…