Point of Law : Observing that dominant purpose of policy is to provide some succour immediately to the Next of Kin [NoK] of the deceased to tide over the initial shock and hardship before lodging claim for just compensation under the law.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. M. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. S. Baruah, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 1, 4, 5 and 6 and Mr. P.S. Deka, learned Senior Counsel and Standing Counsel, Revenue and Disaster Management Department for the respondent no. 2.

2. The petitioner has instituted this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking inter-alia a direction to the State respondent authorities to disburse an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- in terms of a notification dated 15.11.2014 of the Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Government of Assam claiming that she is the Next of Kin [NoK] of the deceased person viz. Late Pratap Hazarika.

3. The petitioner has claimed to be the wife of the deceased person, Late Pratap Hazarika.

4. The case projected by the petitioner, in brief, is that her deceased husband, Late Pratap Hazarika was working as a conductor in a bus bearing registration no. AS-01/FC-0885 [Ultra Bus], owned by M/s Green Valley and run under the aegis of Indian Institute of Technology [IIT], Guwahati. At around 05-00 p.m. on 28.06.2019, when the driver of the said bus was taking out the bus from the parking lot, Pratap Hazarika tried to board the bus but the driver of the bus negligently accelerated the bus as a result of which Pratap Hazarika fell down from the bus and sustained serious injuries on his person. He was thereafter, immediately taken to the nearby health facility, the GNRC at North Guwahati. Finding his condition serious, the doctors at the GNRC referred him to the Gauhati Medical College and Hospital [GMCH] Guwahati for advanced treatment. As there was no ICU bed vacant at the GMCH, Pratap Hazarika was admitted in the Health City Hospital at Khanapara. Late Pratap Hazarika expired during the course of the medical treatment on 04.07.2019. In connection with the accident, a First Information Report [FIR] was lodged before the Officer In-Charge, North Guwahati Police Station on 22.07.2019 and the said FIR has been registered as North Guwahati Police Station case no. 96/2019 under Sections 279/304A, IPC. The Registrar of Births and Deaths, Kamrup [M] Guwahati-781001 has also issued a Death Certificate dated 25.07.2019 recording the death of Late Pratap Hazarika as 04.07.2019.

5. It is stated that after the death of her husband, Late Pratap Hazarika, the petitioner submitted a representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup [M] on 05.07.2021 seeking the ex-gratia amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- for the deceased person in terms of the policy framed by the Government in the Revenue and Disaster Management Department and as notified by the notification dated 15.11.2014. When no response was received from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup [R] the petitioner has approached this Court by this writ petition.

6. It has, thus, been contended on behalf of the petitioner that she is the Next of Kin [NoK] of the deceased person who died in a road traffic accident occurred on 28.06.2019 at a public place and in a public carrier. It is further contended that as such Next of Kin [NoK] of the deceased person killed in such accident, she is entitled to receive the quantum of relief in terms of the policy formulated by the State Government, which has been notified by the notification dated 15.11.2014.

7. On perusal of the said notification dated 15.11.2014, it is noticed that the same has, inter-alia, made a provision for ex-gratia grant to the Next of Kin [NoK] of person killed due to accident in public place or in public carrier [other than killed by extremist/terrorist, miscreants and due to firing of security forces] and such relief has been quantified at Rs. 2,00,000/- for each deceased person in respect of accident which had occurred in the State on or after the date of the notification i.e. 15.11.2014. It has been brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel for the parties that due to certain ambiguity with regard to the term ‘public pl