Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010138692025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./227/2025 HEMANTA BORA S/O LATE KHIROD BORA, VILL. GOGOTI (BAHPATI), P.O. AZAD, DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM CUM CHAIRMAN OF STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE (SLC), DISPUR, GUWAHATI 06 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI 06 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI 0 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MR J U AHMED,MR. S RANA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FINANCE Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 10 .09 .2025 Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the review petitioner. Also heard Ms. U. Sharma, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents. 2. This is a review petition filed by the petitioner seeking to review of the order dated 05.05.2025 passed in WP(C) No.2324/2023. 3. The learned counsel for the review petitioner submits that while recording the facts in the order dated 05.05.2025 passed in WP(C) No.2324/2023, it was wrongly recorded that the case of the petitioner was not placed before the District Level Committee (DLC). However, the factual position is that the case of the petitioner was recommended by the DLC and was also placed before the SLC. He therefore, submits that since the ultimate direction in the order is to the concerned authority to take necessary steps to dispose of the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment, the same shall be done as per the rules. 4. The facts narrated in the paragraph No.2 of the said order will have a bearing on the implementation of the directions contained in the paragraph No.7 of the said order. Therefore, the review petition has been filed for the limited purpose. 5. Ms. U. Sarma, learned Government Advocate for the State respondents Page No.# 3/3 does not object to the prayer made. 6. Considering the submissions made and perusal of the review petition and also the order dated 05.05.2025 passed in WP(C) No.2324/2023, it is seen that in paragraph No.2 of the said order it was wrongly recorded that “till date his case has not been placed before the District Level Committee (DLC)”. 7. As per the pleadings, the case of the petitioner was placed before the DLC and recommended and also placed before the SLC and the SLC due to non availability of vacancies rejected the case of the petitioner. 8. Under such circumstances, in view of the directions contained in paragraph No. 7 of the order dated 05.05.2025, it is now incumbent upon the concerned department namely, Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department to examine the case of the petitioner for consideration for appointment on compassionate grounds in respect of any vacancy, if available in any other departments. 9. Accordingly, this review petition is allowed to that extend and disposed of. 10. The order dated 05.05.2025 passed in WP(C) No.2324/2023 shall be read together with the order passed today in this review petition. JUDGE Comparing Assistant