WP(C) 2617/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA. Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned senior counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms R. Chakraborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam. The three petitioners are aggrieved by their non-appointment on compassionate gr ound in spite of their selection for such appointment. From the materials on rec ord, it appears that a selection was conducted for appointment of Constable (AB) , in which the petitioners also participated against 5% quota reserved for appoi ntment on compassionate ground. It is the stand of the petitioners that since th ey have been selected in the said selection, the respondents are duty-bound to a ppoint them. Above aspect of the matter was recorded in the order of this Court passed on 13.12.2010. In the counter affidavit filed by the Respondent No.5, the fact of petitioners b eing selected for appointment on compassionate ground has not been denied. It ha s been stated that the petitioners were duly selected by the District Selection Committee in the recruitment roll for the year 2007-08 and that, the Select List was sent to the Addl. Director General of Police (TAP), Assam for taking necess ary follow up action. In paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit, it has been stated that altogether 2016 posts were notified, out of which, 5% quote were reserved for appointment on co mpassionate ground and that the petitioners were duly qualified in the selection . In paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit, it has been stated that in accordance with the instruction received from the Assam Police Headquarter vide its letter dated 13.7.2010, the respondents have forwarded the proposal for appointment of the petitioners to the Deputy Commissioner Kamrup, who is the Chairman of the D istrict Level Committee. Above is the stand of the Respondent No.5 in the counter affidavit. However, not hing has been stated as to why the petitioners could not be appointed. The respondents having directed the petitioners to appear in a selection for app ointment on compassionate ground and the petitioners having successfully partici pated in the said selection, cannot sit over the matter indefinitely. The respon dents will have to take a decision in the matter consistently with the policy fo r appointment on compassionate ground. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent s to take a decision in the matter as expeditiously as possible, but at any rate , not later than 31st August, 2011.