WP(C) 3629/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. D.C. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R. Chakraborty, learned State Counsel. The petitioners are aspirants for appointment on compassionate ground. A lthough their cases were recommended by the DLC but the SLC rejected their cases with the following observations :- The cases of Sri Prasanna Bora S/o. Late B.C. Bora, gunman who died on 13.8.200 1 and prayer petition submitted on 27.1.05 and Sri Uttam Kr. Roy, S/o. Late D.N. Roy, Gunman who died on 18.4.1999 and prayer petition submitted on 19.9.2000 ha s been rejected as per order of the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court dtd. 3rd August, 2006 in WP(C) No. 3875/05 and in terms of OM No. ABP.357/80/Vol-I/303 dtd. 2.3. 09. So far as the petitioner No.1 Shri Prasanna Bora is concerned, it is on record that he has applied for compassionate appointment. His case was forwarded by the District Commandant, Jorhat on 4.6.2003. Thus, the SLC wrongly mentioned that he had applied on 27.1.2005. That apart, in Achyut Ranjan Das & Ors. Vs. S tate of Assam & Ors. Reported in 2006 (4) GLT 674, this Court issued the follow ing directions regarding all pending applications :- \i) All pending applications against existing and available vacancies as per the quota earmarked including the cases of the petitioners in the present c ases and all others, who may not be before the Court, shall be decided in accord ance with the proposed directions to be laid down in the present order and also in accordance with the principles noted in the preceding paragraphs of this orde r. This will be done within a period of 4 (four) months from today. The present direction naturally has to be considered as a one-time measure in view of the su bsequent direction as laid down in the succeeding paragraphs. In view of the above, irrespective of date of application, all pending c ases were to be considered by the authorities. Such exercise having not been car ried out, this writ petition is disposed off directing the respondents, more par ticularly, the State Level Committee (SLC) to consider the cases of the petition ers afresh taking into all the parameter and yardsticks enumerated in the decisi ons of this Court in Achyut Ranjan Das Vs. State of Assam reported in 2006 (4) G LT 674 followed by decision in Faziron Nessa & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors. Re ported in 2010 (4) GLT 340. With the above directions and observations, the writ petition stands dis posed off, without however, any order as to costs.