THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

ORDER:

The petitioner's husband, Sri P.Raghunath, was working as a Police Constable (PC No. 2149) at Alampur Police Station. On 26.11.2016, while on duty, he pursued suspects transporting five sheep in a vehicle. During the chase, he went missing and was later found dead in a supine position at Kandakam, Sunkulammamettu area. Based on a complaint by the C.I. of Police, a case was registered in Cr.No.304 of 2016 under Section 174 Cr.P.C. at Gadwal Town Police Station. At the time of handing over the body, senior police officials assured the petitioner that the government would sanction ex-gratia of Rs.40 lakhs and bear the educational expenses of her children. Despite her repeated approaches to the authorities, no financial assistance has been received to date. She was, however, appointed on compassionate grounds. The petitioner, a widow with three school-going children, is facing severe hardship. She submitted written representations on 03.04.2018 and 16.05.2018 to the 2^nd respondent seeking ex-gratia and other benefits, but there has been no response. Hence, this writ petition.

2. Heard Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent No.3.

3. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent No.2 filed a counter affidavit stating that the alleged representations dated 03.04.2018 and 16.05.2018 were not received by the District Collector’s office, as confirmed by records. The deceased, Late P. Raghunath, was a Police Constable under the Home Department, which alone manages ex-gratia sanctions and benefits. Respondent No.3 has filed a counter affidavit outlining the circumstances of the death and the benefits paid to petitioner. As per the said counter, the petitioner received Rs.7,37,058/-, including Rs. 1,00,000/- ex- gratia, and was appointed as Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds (proceedings dated 29.08.2017). Other claims like insurance and CPS are in process. Since no representation on ex-gratia was made to the District Collector, no fault lies with that office. Therefore, the writ petition lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.

4. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the record, it is clear that petitioner has already received the benefits admissible under the relevant provisions, including the ex-gratia payment and compassionate appointment. The alleged representations to the District Collector’s office were not received, and matters relating to ex- gratia payments fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Home Department. No negligence or inaction is attributable to the respondents. Accordingly, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.

____________________________ NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J Date: 28.07.2025 dgr