Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010202322021 2026:GAU-AS:763 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6474/2021 PHIRUSH DAIMARI S/O LT. AJANTI DAIMARY R/O VILL. CHAMTABARI P.O. SASTRAPARA P.S. AND DIST. UDALGURI BTC (BTR) ASSAM PIN 784509 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 2:THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 3:ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECY. REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UDALGURI Page No.# 2/3 B.T.C. (BTR) ASSAM PIN 784509 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DARRANG MANALDOI PIN 784125 6:THE BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY. KOKRAJHAR BTAD (BTAR) ASSAM PIN 783370 ------------ Advocate for : MR. R M CHOUDHURY Advocate for : GA ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 22.01.2026 None appears for the petitioner on call. Ms. M. Barman, learned State Counsel; Mr. N. R. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, BTC; and Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department, are present. The claim of the petitioner is for payment of enhanced ex gratia amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) only pursuant to the Notifications dated 15.11.2014 & 06.12.2014 on account of the death of his mother, who reportedly Page No.# 3/3 was killed by the Bodo Extremists on 22.12.1993 at Udalguri weekly market. The petitioner, being the next of kin of the deceased, has been granted ex gratia of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) only and Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) only, making a total amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) only under the Notification/Policy existed during the relevant period. Since the petitioner has already been paid ex gratia amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- under the Policy/Notification in vogue then, prima facie, the petitioner would not be entitled to any further amount, particularly under the Notification of the State which has been came into force subsequently. Upon consideration, it appears that the petitioner has realized that he may not be entitled to any relief and therefore appears to be not interested to pursue this writ petition. Accordingly, writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. JUDGE Comparing Assistant