TRISHNA MONI RAY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. M Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The father of the petitioner who was working as a Havildar under the establishment of Assam Police 8th Battalion died on 30/10/2008 along with other five police personnel due to ambush laid down by extremists at Dimadao village in the Cachar district while they were on duty. Technically, the father of the petitioner was also killed in an extremist attack and therefore, his family would be entitled to the benefits under the Assam Public Services (Appointment of Family Members of Persons Killed by Extremists/Terrorists) Rules, 1992 (in short, the Rules of 1992). Accordingly, the petitioner made an application for an appointment under the Rules of 1992. The application of the petitioner was given a consideration in the minutes of the Committee under the aforesaid Rules of 1992, chaired by the Deputy Commissioner, Bon-gaigaon which was held on 16/9/2016. The minutes recorded that the father of the petitioner Havildar Mukunda Chandra Ray was killed in extremist firing on 30/10/2008. The minutes of the meeting of the Committee took note of an order dtd. 4/5/2016 of this Court in WP(C) No. 1993/2015 which was instituted by Mahananda Kalita claiming for a similar relief.

(3.) This Court in its order took note of the stand of the learned Standing Counsel for the Personnel B Department of the Government of Assam that the recommendation made by the District Authority had been sent back to the Deputy Commissioner, Bongaigaon for consequential decision. The minutes of meeting held on 16/9/2016 was in furtherance of the requirement of the order dtd. 4/5/2016 in WP(C) No. 1993/2015, where there was a requirement of a consequential decision to be taken by the Deputy Commissioner.