MC 611/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY Heard Ms. B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. U.K. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department, Assam. For the order proposed to be passed, it is not considered necessary to issue for mal notice to Respondent No.3. The petitioner herein, as an aspirant for compas sionate appointment, had applied for such appointment against a post in the esta blishment of the Directorate of State Council for Education, Research and Traini ng (SCERT), Guwahati following the death of her father on 23.09.2008. As her ap plication did not evoke any response, she had approached before this Court earli er with WP(C) No.1057/2009, which was disposed of on 09.04.2009 directing the re spondents for consideration of her case for such appointment in terms of the g uidelines laid-down in Achyut Ranjan Das vs. State of Assam and ors, (2006) 4 GL T 674. In view of the undue delay for no fault of hers, she is before this Court again seeking the same relief. During the pendency of the instant proceeding the petitioner had been recommende d for being appointed against a Grade-III post in the Office of the Principal, B asic Training Centre, Sivasagar by the District Level Committee, Sivasagar. Thi s recommendation has since been approved by the State Level Committee. As inspit e thereof, the appointment is not being provided to her, she is before this Cour t for an appropriate direction. In the affidavit filed by Respondent No.2, while the recommendation of the State Level Committee in favour of the petitioner taken on 11.08.2010 has been admitt ed, it has been pleaded that as she and her family are still in occupation of th e official quarter allotted to her deceased father, follow up steps for her appo intment in terms thereof could not betaken. Whereas, Ms. Choudhury has urged that in view of the recommendation of the petit ioner by the District Level Committee and approved by the State Level Committee, she is entitled to compassionate appointment in terms thereof, Mr. Goswami has urged that in order to avail the benefit of such recommendation the petitioner a nd her family are to vacate the quarter presently in their occupation. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a consideration of the b ackground of the litigation, this Court is of the view that the instant petition ought to be closed with the following directions- (1) The respondents would take necessary steps in terms of the recommendation fo r appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground; (2) The petitioner and her family would vacate the quarter presently in their oc cupation within a period of two months from the date of issuance of the appointm ent letter and her joining pursuant thereto; (3) As a condition precedent for the issuance of the appointment letter, the pet itioner would submit a written undertaking to the effect that she would alongwit h her family vacate the quarter presently in their occupation within a period of two months as indicated hereinabove. The writ petition and the miscellaneous case are accordingly disposed of in the above terms. It is made clear the steps referred to hereinabove to resolve the present contro versy are by way of one time measure and would not be cited as a precedent in fu ture. No costs.