WP(C) 955/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY Heard Mr. K Gogoi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S N Sarma, learned senior counsel representing the respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Mr. C Baruah, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union of India. The petitioner who was an aspirant for the post of an unskilled workman in the O il India Limited (hereinafter referred to as the OIL), Duliajan is before this C ourt with a grievance that despite his selection, he was denied appointment by t he OIL authorities on the basis of bar under Clause 3 (iii) & (iv) of the Recrui tment Policy of the Oil India Limited which places restriction on employment of a second member of a family unskilled category. It appears that some similarly denied candidates had challenged the bar imposed on their appointment by the aforesaid Clause 3 (iii) & (iv) and the decision of this Court to upheld the said challenge and declar the clause 3 (iv) to be ultra virus was eventually upheld in the Division Bench decision of Oil India Limited vs. Prabhat Saikia, reported in 2004 (3) GLT 19. The challenge to this Court’s decision, taken in a SLP by the OIL authority was also dismissed by the Supreme Court by order dated 14.3.2007 in Civil Appeal No. 6248/04. In view of above declaration made by the Courts, the petitioner cannot now be de nied appointment on the ground that his brother is already appointed as unskille d labourer. Accordingly the OIL authorities are directed to take up the case of the petition er for appointment, subject of course to petitioner being approved through polic e verification and other legal requirements. This process be expeditiously undertaken and may be completed within 2 months fr om today. The writ petition stands allowed accordingly.