WP(C) 4513/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANIMA HAZARIKA Heard Mr. K R Patgiri, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Als o heard Mr. A Deka, learned Standing counsel, Education Department, Assam. Considering the grievance raised in the writ petition and as agreed to b y the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner’s case in brief is that the petitioner’s husband Late Lab anya Patgiri died on 04.03.2002 due to heard attack while he was in service leav ing behind his wife, minor son, daughter and aged parents. Her deceased husband was working as a Grade-IV employee in Bajali HS School, Pathsala and his post wa s confirmed w.e.f. 04.02.1994 (Annexure-1). After death of her husband, the enti re family had to face extreme financial hardship and hence the petitioner submit ted application for appointment on compassionate ground in the office of the res pondent No.4. After waiting for long, when no action was taken by the authority, she having no alternative filed a writ petition before this Court being W.P(C) No.3647/2005. Vide order dated 20.05.2005 the said writ petition was disposed of directing the authority to consider her case for appointment in the post commen surate to her qualification subject to suitability, eligibility and availability of vacancy within a period of 4(four) months. The petitioner after communicatio n of the said order has been waiting for appointment but the respondents have do ne nothing as per direction of the Court’s order. Hence she had to file a contem pt petition being Cop(C) No.76/2006. Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perusal of the records produced on behalf of the contemners, this Court passed an order closing the contempt proceeding as because no vacanc y was available during that period to accommodate her. This Court further direct ed the respondents to appoint the petitioner as and when a vacancy arises. Howev er the petitioner has been waiting in expectation that as and when some vacancy arises she would be appointed in the vacant post as directed this Court but the petitioner has recently come to know that the case of the petitioner has not bee n placed before the Committee, which was constituted, pursuant to the judgment a nd order dated 03.08.2006 passed in Achyut Ranjan Das & Others Vs. State of Assa m & Others, reported in 2006 (4) GLT 674. As per guidelines issued in Achyut Ra njan (supra), after constitution of the District Level Selection Committee (DLSC for short), it is the duty of respondent No.4 to place the case of the petition er before the DLSC, however, the same has not been done and, therefore, the peti tioner has again submitted the representation dated 07.09.2009, before the respo ndent No.4. But till date her case has not been placed before the DLSC. Hence th e instant writ petition. Having regard to the issue raised and the decision rendered by this Cour t as mentioned above, this writ petition is closed with a direction that the pet itioner’s case shall be considered in terms of the guidelines laid down in Achyu t Ranjan Das (supra). The petitioner is at liberty to submit a copy of the writ petition along with the annexures appended thereto with a certified copy of this order, as well as copy of the order dated 03.08.2006 passed in WP(C) No.3875/2005 before the r espondent No.4, the Inspector of Schools, Barpeta District Circle, Barpeta, for taking necessary action. This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to cost.