Kathula Uppalamma v. The State Of Telangana And 4 Others

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.20853 OF 2019 O R D E R :

Heard Sri T.Kistaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Cooperation and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

This writ petition is filed for the following relief: ".............Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 5 in not paying the Ryothu Bandhu Group Life Insurance Scheme 2018-19 pursuant to the G.O.Ms.No.63, Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri.II) Department, dt.19.6.2018 for death of petitioner's late husband Rama Lingaiah is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 5 to pay Ryothu Bandhu Group Life Insurance Scheme 2018-19 pursuant to the G.O.Ms.No.63, Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri..II) Department, dt.19.06.2018 for death of petitioner's late husband Rama Lingaiah,............."

It has been contended by the petitioner that her husband was a farmer and he committed suicide on 05.12.2018. She further contends that the Government has come up with a scheme for all the farmers vide G.O.Ms.No.63, Agriculture and Cooperation (Agri.II) Department, dt.19.06.2018 wherein a sum of Rs.5 lakhs assured under the scheme would be paid to the nominee of the enrolled farmer, on his/her death, due to any cause, declared by him/her and as per the said scheme, her husband made an application to the respondents making her as his nominee. She further contends that after the death of her husband, she has submitted an application on 21.12.2018 to the 5th respondent for grant of relief under the above said scheme.

But so far, the 5th respondent has not passed any orders on the said application.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that as per the scheme dt.19.06.2018, the farmers in the age group of 18 to 59 years as on 18.08.2018 (born between 14.08.1959 and 15.08.2000, both days inclusive) are eligible for the year 2018-19 and that the petitioner's husband is eligible under the said scheme as his date of birth is 14.08.1959. He further contends that as per the regulations of the scheme, the claim of the family members of the victim should be considered within 10 days from the date of receiving the application. But the respondents, inspite of lapse of 2 years, are not considering the application of the petitioner. Therefore, he contends that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the 5th respondent to settle the claim of the petitioner within a reasonable period of time. Learned Government Pleaders appearing for the respondents contends that since the claim of the petitioner is pending with the 5th respondent, the 5th respondent be directed to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the 5th respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner on 21.12.2018 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a reasonable period, preferably within a period of eight

(08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand closed.

_________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI,J Date: 06.02.2020 dv