Bombay High CourtWP/3382/2018dismissedrule discharged

Mrs. Sangeeta W/O Vivek Netam v. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Department Of Home, Mumbai And Another

2020-02-25Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.S. Chandurkar,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Vinay Joshi2 pages

908-WP-3382-18 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO.3382 OF 2018 Sangeeta w/o Vivek Naitam, Chamorshi Road, Behind office of Paper Mill, Gadchiroli -vsState of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Home Mantralaya, Mumbai and anr. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders Court'

s or Judge'

s Orders.

or directions and Registrar'

s orders.

Shri R. R. Vyas, Advocate for petitioner.

Ms Shamsi Haider, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents. CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND VINAY JOSHI, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 25, 2020 The petitioner seeks enhancement in the amount of compensation that was awarded to her in view of the fact that her husband who was working in the Police Department was killed in Naxalite attack on 07/08/1997. As per Government Resolution dated 13/03/1996 the petitioner had received compensation amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. According to the petitioner the respondents had given benefit of subsequent Government Resolution dated 28/02/2012 even to such persons who had received benefit under the earlier Government Resolution. On 04/02/2020 we had directed the learned Assistant Government Pleader to obtain instructions in this regard and to identify if any person has been granted such benefit despite having received amount of Rs.2,00,000/- under Government Resolution dated 13/03/1996. Today it is informed that such benefit has not been granted to any such person who have received benefit under Government Resolution dated 13/03/1996. The

908-WP-3382-18 2/2 subsequent Government Resolution dated 16/07/2005 has been made applicable from 01/02/2005.

In that view of the matter as the husband of the petitioner lost his life on 07/08/1997, benefit under the subsequent Government Resolution would not be admissible.

The writ petition is therefore dismissed. No costs. JUDGE JUDGE Asmita