WP(C) 4024/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.MUSAHARY Heard Mr. A. Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. B.K. Sharma, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam. The petitioners are the son and wife of one Bhupendra Narayan Basumatary who was killed by unknown extremists on 15.6.1993 at his residence and in this regard a police case being Sidli P.S. Case No. 60/1993 u/s. 302 IPC was registered. At the time of occurrence the petitioner No. 1 was a minor boy of 12 years and he was not eligible for appointment to any post. The Government of Assam as per Ass am Public Service (Appointment of the Family Members of Persons Killed by the Ex tremists/ Terrorists) Rules, 1992, provided ex-gratia of Rs. 1 lakh and employme nt in public service to the next kin of the persons killed by extremists. The pe titioners at the initial stage moved the authorities concerned for appointment o n compassionate ground but till date no such appointment has been provided to th em. In the meantime the govt. of Assam has issued another notification on 14.12. 2004 by which the amount of ex-gratia has been enhanced from one lakh to 3 lakhs abolishing the scheme providing job. By this notification the govt. intended to provide ex-gratia to the tune of Rs. 3 lakhs only without providing any job to the next of kin to the persons killed by extremists. Mr. Dasgupta, learned counsel fairly submits that expecting appointment on comp assionate ground the petitioners did not opt for ex-gratia or employment under t he aforesaid rules of 1992. As the family is suffering from acute financial hard ship, the petitioners now want to avail the existing opportunity provided by the Govt. inasmuch as the earlier provision/ policy for providing employment has be en abolished. It is not for this Court to consider as to whether any relief could be granted t o the petitioners directing the respondent authorities to grant enhanced ex-grat ia amount at this stage. There is no denial of the fact that the petitioner’s fa ther/ husband was killed by extremist on 15.6.1993 while he was in service in t he Irrigation Department as Khalassi under the State Government. At the same tim e, as it appears from paragraph 5 of the Govt. notification dated 14.12.2004, t he cases of Govt. employees would not come under the purview of this notificatio n. If that is so, no relief as sought for by the petitioners, could be granted t o them under the 1992 Rules. However, the petitioners are left with opportunity to approach the Govt. with necessary particulars for appointment under the schem e of compassionate appointment as the petitioner’s father/ husband, a Govt. empl oyee, died in harness. At this stage, considering the elapse of long period of m ore than 17 years since the Govt. servant died in harness, it may not be legally tenable to accommodate any of the petitioners under the scheme of compassionate appointment as per the present law settled by the Apex Court. But the family me mbers of the Govt. employee who has been killed by extremist would be left with only option to approach the Govt. for the ex-gratia amount under the existing po licy of the Government. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to file an application/ representation before the Govt. through the D.C. Chirang District who shall forward the same with relevant documents to the Govt. and on receipt of such application/ representation for grant of ex-gratia amount in terms of the present scheme, the respondent authorities concerned sha ll consider and pass necessary speaking order with due communication to the peti tioners. The writ petition stands disposed of.