Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8764 (GAU)

TAMIJ ALI v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS

WP(C)/2516/2025 · 2025-06-15

Sanjay Kumar Medhi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010047772025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2516/2025 TAMIJ ALI S/O- LATE ABDUL ALI, R/O MLL.- DOKOHA, P.O.- ARANGAMOW, P.S.- NALBARI, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN- 781347 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP.BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE (RELIEF AND REHABILITATION) AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPPTT DISPUR GUMHAT 6 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER NALBARI DIST NALBAARI ASSAM PO AND PS NALBARI PIN 781335 4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER BARBHAG REVENUE CIRCLE PO KAMARKUCHI PS NALBARI DIST NALBARI ASSAM PIN 781347 5:THE OFFICER IN CHARGE NALBARI PS PO NALBARI DIST NALBARI ASSAM PIN 78133 Advocate for the Petitioner : S I AKAND, MR A CHOUDHURY,MR. R Deka Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, SC, FINANCE,GA, ASSAM 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. Also heard Shri S. S. Roy, learned State Counsel as well as Ms. G. Hazarika, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department. The matter pertains to a claim for ex-gratia in connection with death in a motor vehicle accident. Both the learned counsel for the respondents have however placed before this Court an order dated 21.06.2024 passed by a Coordinate Bench in WP(C)/2700/2023, in which this Court after elaborate discussion had held that the notification for ex-gratia dated 15.11.2024 cannot be extended to a case of this nature. Though Shri Akand, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the accident in question is prior to the date of the judgment, such submission would not be sustainable in view of the fact that the judgment of the Court is always retrospective unless the same is clarified by the Court itself. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would like to withdraw the writ petition. Writ petition accordingly stands dismissed on withdrawal. JUDGE Comparing Assistant