WP(C) 6006/2006 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE IA ANSARI Heard Mr. PK Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. MK M ishra, learned Standing counsel, Education Department, appearing on behalf of th e respondents. The petitioner, in this writ petition, is aggrieved by non-consideration of her appointment on compassionate ground. The petitioner’s claim is that her case was considered, in terms of relevant Government policy, by District level committee , on 09-06-2004, and she was selected for appointment on compassionate ground, b ut her case has not been considered by the State Government. In almost similar s ituation, the Court, in its order, dated 09-09-2008, passed in W.P(C) No.1060 of 2008 directed, while disposing of the writ petition, as follows:- Reading the aforesaid two directions issued by the Court, it clearly appears th at as a one-time measure all pending cases were required to be considered in acc ordance with the other specific directions contained in paragraph 7 of the judgm ent. Once consideration of a case as a one-time measure is over, such applicatio ns that may remain pending are not required to be considered, if a period of mor e than two years had elapsed. Taking into consideration the above observations, in W.P(C) No. 2447/08, a Court further observed and directed, in the order, dated 09-09-2008, in W.P(C) 1060/0 8 as follows: In view of the aforesaid decision of this Court the view taken by the State Lev el Committee cannot be sustained. The rejection of the cases of the petitioners as made by the State Level Committee are, therefore, interfered with the directi on that the cases of the petitioners will now receive de-novo consideration by t he State Level Committee in its next meeting. The writ petition, consequently, is disposed of in the above terms. In the backdrop of above facts, it is clear that the present writ petition too n eeds to be considered by the State Level Committee in accordance with the guidel ines, which have been issued in the case of Achyut Ranjan Das and ors - Vs- Stat e of Assam and ors, reported in 2006(4) GLT 674. Considering, therefore, the matter in its entirety and in the interest of justic e, it is hereby directed that the case of the petitioner shall be placed by the State respondents before the State Level Committee for consideration, in accorda nce with the guidelines, which have been issued in Achyut Ranjan Das (supra).