Election Duty COVID Death: Allahabad HC Quashes DM Order Denying Rs. 30 Lakh to Teacher's Widow

The Allahabad High Court recently quashed the District Magistrate Etawah’s order rejecting a widow’s claim for Rs. 30 lakh ex-gratia compensation following the death of her husband, a lecturer who contracted COVID-19 shortly after performing Panchayat election duty in April 2021.

The bench of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi held that the District Magistrate (DM) had wrongly discarded medical and lab records that substantiated the infection and proceeded on an erroneous assessment of the evidence on record.

The petitioner, Smt. Raj Kumari, approached the high court after her representation seeking ex-gratia under the Government Order dated June 1, 2021 was rejected. Her husband, Kaushal Kishore, a Lecturer at Janta Inter College, Bakewar, was deployed for election duty on April 19, 2021 at the peak of the pandemic. Immediately thereafter, he developed high fever, breathing distress and other symptoms associated with COVID-19. He underwent treatment on April 22 and 24 and was examined again at the Government Hospital, Etawah on April 27, where doctors suspected COVID-19 and advised testing. His first sample required repeat testing; the subsequent test, conducted on April 29, confirmed him as antigen positive. He died on May 1 while being taken to Saifai Medical College for further treatment.

Under the June 1, 2021 government order, an ex-gratia amount of Rs. 30 lakh is payable if a government employee deployed on election duty dies within one month of such duty.

As Kishore died within 12 days, the petitioner argued her claim fully fell within the scheme. Despite this, the District Magistrate rejected her request on July 2, 2022, holding that no valid COVID-19 report had been submitted and relying on statements of two doctors who denied issuing the antigen-positive slip.

Before the high court, the petitioner produced hospital prescriptions, UP Covid Lab documents and an antigen-positive report dated April 29. She submitted that these constituted official records and could not be brushed aside by merely citing the doctors’ denial of signatures.

The State opposed the plea, stating that without an authenticated antigen or RT-PCR report, no compensation could be extended.

The bench examined the documents and found that the emergency hospital prescription, UP Covid Lab slip advising repeat sampling, and the antigen-positive report contained specific identifiers such as Case ID, UHID code, patient name and emergency token number.

Court noted that neither the hospital nor the UP Covid Lab had denied these records or the Case ID linked to the deceased. It further observed that the doctors’ statements only indicated they had not signed the slip, not that the documents were forged or invalid.

Court also acknowledged the context of the pandemic, where medical staff were overburdened and documentation could bear signatures of different personnel on duty.

Holding that the District Magistrate had rejected the claim without proper verification of the medical records, court said the authority was “not justified in rejecting the claim… only on the basis of the statements of two doctors without verifying the facts from the lab and the hospital”.

It concluded that the DM’s order proceeded on incorrect assumptions despite the presence of adequate medical evidence demonstrating that the teacher had contracted COVID-19 after election duty and died within the stipulated period under the compensation scheme.

Allowing the petition, the high court quashed the July 2, 2022 order and directed the District Magistrate, Etawah to reconsider the widow’s claim in light of its observations. Court directed that a fresh decision must be taken within one month from the date a certified copy of the order is presented.

Case Title: Smt. Raj Kumari vs. State of UP and 3 Others

Order Date: November 27, 2025

Bench: Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi