SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 9017

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
NAH DAIMARI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS – Respondent
WP(C) / 6690 / 2021



GAHC010204032021 2025:GAU-AS:17403

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/6690/2021

NAH DAIMARI

S/O. LT. SANTAL DAIMARI, VILL. BAGWNTOLA, P.O., P.S. AND DIST.

UDALGURI, BTC (BTR), ASSAM.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FINANCE

DEPTT., ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.

2:THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

DISPUR

GUWAHATI-781006.

3:THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY

REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT.

DISPUR

GUWAHATI-06.

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UDALGURI

B.T.C (BTR) ASSAM

PIN-784509.

5:THE CEPUTY COMMISSIONER

DARRANG

MANGALDOI

PIN-784125.

6:THE BODOLAND TERRIORIAL COUNCIL REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY KOKRAJHAR BTAD (BTAR)

ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R M CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : , MR. S R RABHA (SC, BTC, R-6),MS. S SARMA (GA, ASSAM, R-

2,4,5),MR. R BARPUJARI (SC, FINANCE AND SC, REVENUE & DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPT., R-1,3)

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE Date on which judgment is reserved : N/A Date of pronouncement of judgment : 16.12.2025 Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the judgment : No Whether the full judgment has been Pronounced : Yes Judgment & Order(Oral)

Heard Mr. R.M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Also heard Mr. A. Bhattacharya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue; Mr. J. Handique, learned Standing Counsel, GA, Assam; Ms. H. Baruah, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 and Ms. B. Bora, learned counsel for the respondent no.6.

2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to pay the ex-gratia grant of Rs. 5,00,000/- in terms of the notification dated 15.11.2014, by which the quantum of relief in respect of persons who were killed/injured due to extremist violence/ terrorist violence/acts of miscreants/communal violence etc. has been revised.

3. The father of the petitioner late Santal Daimari, resident of village : Bagwntola, PO, P.S and District – Udalguri, BTC(BTR), Assam was killed by the miscreants on 08.03.1989 and the dead body was thrown in the river Dhansiri. Accordingly, a case was registered as Udalguri P.S Case No.62/1989 under Section

302/201/34 IPC R/W Section 3/4 TADA (P) Act.

4. The petitioner, being a son of late Santal Daimari was paid ex-gratia grant of Rs.1,00,000/- in terms of the Assam Public Services (appointment of family members and persons killed by the extremist/terrorist, Rules, 1992) which has been repealed subsequently.

5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Government of Assam in the Revenue and Disaster Management Department vide notification dated 15.11.2014 has revised the quantum of relief of ex-gratia grant payable to the Next of Kin of the persons who were killed/injured by the extremist/ terrorist / miscreants/ up to Rs. 5,00,000/-. Since the father of the petitioner was killed by unknown miscreants/extremist, the petitioner is entitled to receive an enhanced ex-gratia grant of Rs.

5,00,000/- in terms of the notification dated 15.11.2014.

6. The respondent authorities have placed the instructions from the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam and Revenue and Disaster Management Department, which reflects that as per record, Shri Nah Daimari, Next of Kin of late Santal Daimari had already been benefited with the additional ex-gratia grant of Rs.2,00,000/- as per the Government Office Memorandum dated 29.07.2013 in addition to an earlier amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-

granted by the Government vide Sanction dated 23.07.1993.

7. In view of the above instruction, the learned counsel for the petitioner was granted three weeks time to obtain instruction, way back on 31.10.2022. However, today Mr. R.M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner has unable to place any instruction except to submit that the petitioner has only been paid Rs.95,000/- and even not Rs. 1,00,000/- in terms of the earlier notification for payment of ex-gratia gran

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top