Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010201562022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/559/2022 DAMODAR SHAH S/O LATE DHANIK SHAH, R/O NARENGI, NEAR SBI MATHGHARIA BRANCH, P.O.-NARENGI, P.S.-NOONMATI, GUWAHATI, DIST-KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN-781020 VERSUS GYANENDRA DEV TRIPATHI, IAS AND ANR COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE (RELIEF AND REHABILITATION BRANCH) AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, PIN-781006 2:PALLAV GOPAL JHA IAS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF KAMRUP (M) AT GUWAHATI LICHUBAGAN HENGRABARI ASSAM PIN-78103 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R Deka, S I AKAND Advocate for the Respondent : MR. D SAIKIA (r-1), MS. P R MAHANTA (r-1),MR. R BORPUJARI (r-1) Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 16.06.2025 Heard Shri S.I. Akand, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shri R. Borpujari, learned counsel for the respondent no.1. Shri Akand, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that vide the order in question dated 22.02.2022, ex-gratia amount was directed to be paid. He submits that the basis of the claim was a Notification dated 15.11.2014 as per which Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs) was the prescribed amount. He has submitted that only Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) amount has been paid and therefore the order in question has not been fully complied with. Shri Borpujari, the learned counsel for the respondents has however submitted that the direction for payment is admittedly in terms of the aforesaid Notification dated 15.11.2014 which itself lays down a clause that accidents happening prior to the said date would be governed by the earlier Office Memorandum / Notifications. He has submitted that it is not in dispute that the accident in the instant case was on a prior date. He has also submitted that the direction is for payment as per the Notification and therefore, there is no wilful or deliberate disobedience. Shri Akand, the learned counsel has fairly submitted that on that aspect he may not have any issue to join. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the present complaint may not be maintainable and accordingly, the contempt case is closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant