ORDER : Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr. Sahid Khan, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. 3. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 4. 4. This writ petition has been filed for the following relief : “For issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction directing the concerned respondents to immediately and forthwith release the insured amount to the petitioner as the husband of the petitioner died in harness during the Parliamentary Election of 2004, which was assured by the respondents And a further writ / order/direction to pay the aforesaid amount along with interest from the date of death till payment.” 5. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State submits a counter-affidavit has been filed by the District Election Officer-cum-Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa mentioning therein that the husband of the petitioner was deputed to Noamundi, West Singhbhum as a Reserve Polling Officer, but unfortunately he expired while on duty during election process and the claim of the petitioner for the insurance coverage of her deceased husband has been forwarded to the insurance company namely ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company. He further submits that a counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.4 mentioning therein that the husband of the petitioner had expired due to cardiac arrest and as per the terms mentioned in para – 8, 9 and 10 of the counter-affidavit filed by respondent no.4, the said authority has submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as the death of her husband is not covered by the Insurance Company. 6. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent by referring to para – 9 of the writ petition, submits that there is no dispute that the husband of the petitioner had expired due to cardiac arrest. 7. After hearing the counsel for the respondent-State and after going through the materials on record, this Court finds that there is no dispute that the husband of the petitioner died due to breathlessness and chest pain while he was on election duty. Upon perusal of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, it appears that the scope of coverage of the Insurance is covered only when the insured person sustains any bodily injury resulting solely and directly from accident caused by external violent and visible means unless otherwise agreed by the company. Upon perusal of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, it appears that the scope of coverage of the Insurance is covered only when the insured person sustains any bodily injury resulting solely and directly from accident caused by external violent and visible means unless otherwise agreed by the company. This Court finds that there is nothing on record to suggest that the insurance coverage of the deceased husband of the petitioner was available even in cases of cardiac arrest. The terms and condition of the insurance has been filed by way of supplementary counter affidavit by the Respondent no 4. No rejoinder has been filed by the writ petitioner to this counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit. 8. Accordingly, this Court does not find any merits in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed.