WP(C) 6252/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH Heard Mr. R. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.N.Goswami, lear ned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3. Also heard Mr. K. Das, lear ned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 and Ms. A. Verma, l earned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4. In view of the facts revealed on the records, it is considered that this writ petition can be disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner had already approached for appointment on compassionate g round under the die-in-harness scheme by filing the writ petition (c) 2522 of 20 10 and this Court vide order dated 03-05-2010 has already directed the concerned respondent authorities as follows: Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with the direction t hat the respondent authorities shall consider the case of the petitioner for app ointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground in terms of the existing sche me. The petitioner shall furnish all the necessary documents as may be required by the authority for consideration for appointment on compassionate ground. It is made clear that the case of the petitioner shall not be rejected on the grou nd of delay inasmuch as the petitioner was immediately appointed by the Headmast er of the school within four months from the date of death of her husband while he was serving in the school. The authority concerned is directed to complete the process as expeditio usly as possible preferably at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. It is the case of the petitioner that even though, this Court had alread y directed to consider the case of the petitioner and that her case not be rejec ted on the ground of late submission of application which, however, has been don e by the authorities as reflected in the document, which is annexed as annexure- 10 to the writ petition. It seems that the aforesaid decision of the State Leve l Committee is contrary to the specific direction of this Court passed in WP(C) 2522 of 2010. In view of the aforesaid direction of this Court given on 03-05-2010, an y decision taken by the State Level Committee on the ground of delay or late sub mission of the application is contrary to the decision of this court and the sam e is not sustainable. Accordingly, the rejection of the application on the grou nd of late submission by the State Level Committee is set aside and the State Le vel Committee is directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner under the die -in-harness scheme afresh as directed by this Court without taking into consider ation the issue of delay and late submission of the application by the petitione r. This writ petition stands disposed of as indicated above.