JYOTSNA DWIVEDI versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2007] 2 S.C.R. 807 · Decided: 19-02-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: AR. LAKSHMANAN · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

. ' 
...... ) 
NOTSNA DWIVEDI 
A 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
FEBRUARY 19, 2007 
[DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND AL TAMAS KABIR, JJ.] 
B 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
Art.32-Writ of Mandamus-Seeking direction to the respondents to 
ensure that promises of 'welfare packages' (allotments) made to widows of C 
martyrs of Kargil war are fulfilled promptly-Respondents filed affidavit 
explaining steps taken to dispose of pending cases of allotment-Jn view of 
the affidavit, writ petition disposed of-Matters pending before High Court-
. Parties directed to approach High Court for early disposal of pending cases. 
The petitioner filed the Writ Petition under Article 32 of the D 
Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 
respondents to ensure that promise of welfare packages made to the widows 
of the martyrs of the Kargil war are fulfilled promptly. 
During the pendency of the writ petition, several orders were passed by E 
this Court issuing various directions. 
Pursuant to directions, the Union oflndia (Ministry of Petroleum and 
Natural Gas) had filed an additional affidavit explaining the steps taken to 
dispose of the pending cases for allotment. It was also stated therein that the 
regular meetings were held by the officials of the Ministry and the Oil p 
Marketing Companies in the presence of the representatives of the 
Directorate General Resettlement, with the allottees, State Administration 
and District Authorities of the States in the month of June 2006 to clear the 
bottlenecks in the commissioning of the pending cases. The answering 
respondent, by letter dated 30.8.2006, has also directed the Oil Marketing 
Companies to endeavour to commission all the pending cases by 31.12.2006. G 
Disposing of the Writ Petition in view of the Additional Affidavit, the 
Court 
807 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
808 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 2 S.C.R. 
HELD: The Ministry has substantially complied with the directions 
issued by this Court. except 9 pending cases, out of which 2 cases, are pending 
in the High Court, Likewise, another writ petition filed by the Contractors is 
also pending before the High Court. The parties are directed to approach the 
High Court for an early disposal of the pending cases. !Paras 7, 8) 
1809-G, H; 810-A) 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No. 465 of2004. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India) 
Jyotsna Dwivedi, Petitioner-In-Person. 
G.E. Vahanvati, S.G., T.S. Doabia, Shobha Dikshit, A.S. Rawat, Genl., H. 
~aruah, Anil Katiyar, P. Parmeshwaran, Manpreet Singh Doabia, Pradeep 
Mishra, Sandeep Singh and J.K. Bhatia for the Respondents. 
Thi: Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. I. Heard Ms. Jyotsna Dwivedi, Petitioner 
in person and Mr. Goolam E. Vahanvati, Learned Solicitor General oflndia, Mr. 
T.S. Doabia, learned Senior Counsel, Mrs. Shobha Dikshit, learned Senior 
Counsel and Mr. Avatar Singh Rawat, learned counsel for the respondents. 
2. The Writ Petition was filed under Articie 32 of the Constitution of 
Jndia for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents 
to ensure that the promise of welfare packages made to the widows of the 
martyars of the Kargil war are fulfilled promptly. 
3. During the pendency of the writ petition, several orders were passed 
by this Court issuing various directions. Several opportunities were given to 
the parties. At the request of the learned counsel for the States, permission 
was granted to file affidavits. 
4. Pursuant to our directions, the Union of India (Ministry of Petroleum 
G and Natural Gas) has filed an additional affidavit explaining the steps taken 
to dispose of the pending cases for allotment including 22 cases where land 
is to be identified. The Additional Affidavit is filed in pursuance to the 
directions issued by this Court. The status of cases as on 31.12.2006 under 
the Special Scheme "Operation Vijay" Kargil has been mentioned in the 
H Affidavit. The total 492 cases were recommended for grant of the benefit 
JYOTSNA DWIVEDI v. U.0.1. [LAKSHMANAN, J.] 
809 
under the Scheme. 4 7 cases were advised by the Directorate General of A 
Resettlement to be kept in abeyance, since the parties are not interested. 
Thus, there is 445 effective recommendations. The break-up figure has also 
been clearly mentioned in the tabulated statement. 
5. It is also further stated that as on 31.12.2006 there are only 9 cases 
pending for commissioning, and out 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.