WP(C) 5522/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY The petitioner by the present petition has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to pay the enhanced amount of compensation pursuant to t he notification dated 22.06.2004 issued by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Personnel (B) Department to all the Deputy Commissioners intima ting that the ex-gratia payable to the next to kin of a person killed in extremi st violence has been enhanced to Rs.3,00,000/-. I have herd Mr. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr s. V.L. Singh, learned State counsel for the respondents. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that sin ce vide the aforesaid notification dated 22.06.2004 the Commissioner and Secreta ry has enhanced the ex-gratia amount payable to the next to kin of a person kill ed in extremist violence, the petitioner is entitled to the amount of Rs.2,00,00 0/-, the enhanced amount, as he has already received the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as per the earlier scheme of Govt. of Assam circulated vide office memorandum d ated 29.07.1995. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.06.2010 passed in WP(C) No.3355/2007 ha s opined that the persons like the petitioner, who have earlier availed the bene fit under the earlier scheme are also entitled to the benefit under the new sche me as formulated on 22.06.2004. The learned State counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the pet itioner having accepted the amount pursuant to the earlier scheme dated 29.07.19 95, cannot based his claim on the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court, as no judgment of the Court gives a fresh cause of action. It is not in dispute that the petitioner claimed the benefit under the 1 995 scheme for the death of his mother and sister due to extremist violence on 2 4.01.1999. The petitioner accordingly was paid the ex-gratia under the 1995 sche me in the year 2000. The petitioner did not raise any objection thereafter. The petitioner even after formulation of the 2004 scheme vide communication dated 22 .06.2004 did not raise any claim and in the year 2010 has come up with this writ petition claiming benefit under the said scheme as circulated vide notification dated 22.06.2004, based on the aforesaid Division Bench judgment of the Court. The petitioner having accepted the earlier amount and as no judgment of the Cour t gives a fresh cause of action, I am of the view that the petitioner is not ent itled to any relief as claimed. Hence the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.