WP(C) 1868/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. S. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R . Chokraborty, learned State counsel. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction to consider his case for appointment on compassionate appointment. The prayer s o made is on account of expiry of his father Late Pulin Borah on 01.05.06 while he was in service as Constable in 11th APBn., Dergaon. While the learned counse l for the petitioner upon reference to Annexure-4 letter dated 09.06.2010 submit s that the case of the petitioner was forwarded to the appropriate authority, Ms . R. Chokraborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate submits that the petitioner h aving submitted the application for compassionate appointment beyond the stipula ted period of time, he is not entitled to get any consideration. However, learne d counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had submitted the appli cation within the stipulated period of time. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case of the petitioner, the w rit petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider his case in te rms of the guidelines laid down in Achyut Ranjan Das vs. State of Assam and othe rs reported in 2006 (4) GLT 674 and the judgment dated 02.07.2010 passed in a b atch of writ petition lead case being W.P.(C) No. 2620/09 (Faziron Nessa vs. Sta te of Assam and others). Needless to say that the petitioner cannot claim consid eration of his case against any particular post or service and the consideration will be strictly as per the parameters and yardstick laid down in the guideline s. Writ petition is disposed of.