JUDGMENT I.M.QUDDUSI,J. — This writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite party nos. 4 and 5, i.e. the Director General of Police, Orissa and the Inspector General of Police, Orissa to restore ‘Z’ category security coverage to the petitioner and communicate their decision to opposite party no.1. 2. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is a political personality and a resident of M.V.55, P.O. Chitrangapa¬li in the district of Malkangiri. He was elected as M.L.A., Malkangiri Assembly Constituency from 1995 to 1999 and was also a Cabinet Minister from May, 2000 to 2004. Now he is the General Secretary of Samajbadi Party and is looking after the organiza¬tional affairs of the party in the State of Orissa. After deploy¬ment of C.R.P.F. in Malkangiri district to combat the Naxal menace, the Naxals have targeted the petitioner thinking that he is instrumental in deployment of C.R.P.F. and time and again tried to do away with the life of the petitioner. They had exploded a land mine while the carcade carrying the petitioner was on its way to Malkangiri in the year 2001. His two houses, one at Malkangiri and the other at M.V. 55, were also blasted by the Naxalites in 2002 and 2005 respectively. They have also taken away the lives of many of the supporters of the petitioner during the period from 2001 and 2005. From 2001, the petitioner has been provided with ‘Z’ category security, which was withdrawn by the State Government on 4th of July, 2008. So, the petitioner represented to opposite party no. 1 against the illegal withdrawal of ‘Z’ category security to the petitioner and opposite party no.1 considering the report of the Central Security Agency that the petitioner was in the hit list of L.W.Es, vide his letter dated 12th August, 2008 intimated the Chief Secretary, Government of Orissa-opposite party no.2 as under: “Sir, I am directed to refer to this Ministry’s letter No. VI.23014/193/2008-VS dated 23rd July, 2008 and to state that the matter has been examined in this Ministry in consultation with Central Security agencies. As per their report, Shri Dhali has been in the hit list of LWEs since the year 2001. As per their report, Shri Dhali has been in the hit list of LWEs since the year 2001. His house was attacked twice and blasted by LWEs in December 2001 and November 2005 while he had a narrow escape in yet another attack on his vehicle in February, 2002. State Level Security Committee (SLSC) of Orissa reportedly reviewed his security arrangement on 23rd July, 2008 and decided to restore his Z category security cover. 2. In view of the above, the Govt. of Orissa is requested to look into the matter and immediately restore his security cover in order to avoid any untoward incident.” By letter No. 3852/C. dated 21.8.2008 (Annexure-3), the Deputy Secretary to Government of Orissa, Home (Special Section) Department while communicating a copy of the aforesaid letter of the Government of India requested the D.G. & I.G. of Police, Orissa, Cuttack to take action accordingly to avoid any untoward incident and to restore the ‘Z’ security coverage to the peti¬tioner as intimated earlier in letter No. 3385/C. dated 23.7.2008. It is alleged by the petitioner that inspite of all these, the ‘Z’ security coverage has not been restored to the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State stating that security is being given to dignitaries and other persons considering the threat perception. Threat perception of the person is assessed by the Intelligence wing of the State. The report of the Intelligence Wing is kept in view by the State Level Security Committee Meeting while considering security arrangement for any person. Considering the gravity of the threat, the Committee allows the category of security to be provided to the person. The threat perception assessed by the State Intelligence Wing so far as the petitioner is concerned was considered in the State Level Security Committee Meeting held on 7.4.2008 and it was decided to withdraw ‘Z’ category security earlier provided to the petitioner and to provide him with ‘X’ category security. Subsequently, in view of the naxal menace in Malkangiri District at that time the security of the petitioner was reviewed by the Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, who is the Chairman of the Security Committee on 15.7.2008 and it was decided that ‘Z’ category security coverage be restored to the petitioner. Subsequently, in view of the naxal menace in Malkangiri District at that time the security of the petitioner was reviewed by the Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, who is the Chairman of the Security Committee on 15.7.2008 and it was decided that ‘Z’ category security coverage be restored to the petitioner. Pursuant to the letter dated 12.8.2008 of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, requesting the Government of Orissa to restore security cover to the petitioner, the State Government again reminded the D.G. & I.G. of Police, Orissa as well as the Director, Intelligence, Orissa to provide ‘Z’ category security coverage to the petitioner. However, on the basis of the intelligence report dated 23.9.2008 submitted by the Director-cum-Addl.D.G. of Po¬lice, Intelligence, Orissa it was decided by the Government on 30.9.2008 to allow ‘Z’ category security provision to the peti¬tioner in the Malkangiri district and ‘Y’ category security in other parts of the State considering different degree of threat perception at different places. Counter affidavit has also been filed on behalf of opposite party nos. 4 and 5 stating more or less what has been stated in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State. It is stated therein that the Government of Orissa vide letter No. 4796/C dated 14.10.2008 directed the D.G.& I.G. of Police, Orissa, Cuttack to provide ‘Z’ category security to the petitioner in Malkangiri district and ‘Y’ category in rest of the State and security coverage is being provided to the petition¬er according to the said direction of the State Government. 4. We have perused the file produced by the learned Additional Government Advocate. It appears from the letter dated 12th of August, 2008 (Annexure-1) of the Government of India that the matter relating to providing security coverage to the petitioner was examined by the Ministry of Home Affairs in consultation with the Central Security agencies which reported that the petitioner is in the hit list of left wing extremists since the year 2001 and considering the various attempts on the life of the petition¬er, the Ministry of Home Affairs recommended to the State Govern¬ment to restore his security cover so as to avoid any untoward incident. It also appears that the State Level Security Committee of Orissa reviewed his security arrangement on 23rd July 2008 and decided to restore his Z category security cover. It also appears that the State Level Security Committee of Orissa reviewed his security arrangement on 23rd July 2008 and decided to restore his Z category security cover. It appears from the Government file that in the State Level Security Commit¬tee held on 7.4.2008 it was decided that as there was no threat to the petitioner either at Malkangiri district or at Bhubanes¬war, the ‘Z’ category security provided to the petitioner be reduced to ‘X’ scale. But on 15.7.2008 decision was taken to consider the petitioner as ‘Z’ scale protectee in the State in view of the Maoist activities at Malkangiri. But again the said deci¬sion was modified on 30.9.2008 and decision was taken to provide ‘Z’ security at Malkangiri and ‘Y’ security in rest part of the State to the petitioner on the recommendation of the Director Intelligence and accordingly letter dated 14.10.2008 was issued to the D.G. & I.G. of Police, Orissa. 5. No doubt security is provided to a person considering the threat perception. As reported by the Central Security Agen¬cies, the petitioner is in the hit list of left wing extremists. The threat perception cannot be said to be of different degrees at different places. When one is targeted by any extremist wing, such wing would ordinarily try to take advantage of weaker moment to fulfil their mission. The State Government which is responsi¬ble for the life and liberty of its citizens should leave no stone unturned to provide security if there is any constant threat to the life of any citizen. Considering the gravity of the threat to the life of the petitioner, the State Government had provided him ‘Z’ category security at Malkangiri and that of ‘Y’ category at places other than Malkangiri district. Such decision was taken on the basis of the letter dated 25th September, 2008 which was based on the basis of the letter dated 4th June, 2008 of the S.P., Malkangiri addressed to the Director of Intelligence, Orissa. But the Government of India recommended for restoration of ‘Z’ category security to the petitioner on the basis of the report of the Central Security Agencies submitted much after 4th June, 2008. But the Government of India recommended for restoration of ‘Z’ category security to the petitioner on the basis of the report of the Central Security Agencies submitted much after 4th June, 2008. In such circumstances, we do not find any justification in the order dated 14.10.2008 of the State Government directing to provide ‘Z’ security to the petitioner in the district of Malkangiri and ‘Y’ category at rest of the places of the State. We, therefore, call upon opposite parties 2 to 5 to implement the recommendation of the Ministry of Home Affairs dated 12th of August, 2008 as contained in Annexure-1 and restore the ‘Z’ category security to the petitioner throughout the State. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. B.N. MOHAPATRA, J. I agree. Petition disposed of.