JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. S.B. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. S.P. Choudhury, learned counsel representing Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 4 & 5. Although notice had been duly served upon the Respondent No.6, no representation is made on his behalf. 2. Challenge made is to the order dated 27.09.2010 issued under the hand of the Director of Soil Conservation, Assam as well as to the order dated 10.01.2011 issued under the hand of the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Soil Conservation Department. Facts to be noticed is that the petitioner was appointed as Soil Conservation Field Worker under the establishment of Respondent No.4 on 02.07.1990 and thereafter granted officiating promotion to the rank of Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior) on 06.03.1997. In so far as the Respondent No.6 is concerned, he was appointed as Soil Conservation Field Worker on 06.08.1990 and subsequently allowed officiating promotion as Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior) on 14.12.1998. The officiating promotion granted to the petitioner was cancelled by order dated 03.02.2001 and consequent thereto, he filed two writ petitions before this Court i.e. WP(C) 6998/2002, claiming arrear salary in the officiating post and WP(C) 6999/2002, challenging the cancellation order dated 03.02.2001 as well as the order dated 14.12.1998, whereby officiating promotion was granted to the Respondent No.6. Additional challenge made was to the Gradation List dated 08.03.1995 wherein the name of the petitioner was shown at Sl. No.488 and that of the Respondent No.6 at Sl. No.465. Whereas the first writ petition was allowed, the second writ petition was disposed of by order dated 26.08.2010. While rendering the said order, this Court noticed that the grievances raised by the petitioner was also the subject-matter in Case No.45 ATA/2001 preferred before the Assam Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati. This Court also noticed that the said case was disposed of by the Tribunal by order dated 29.08.2001 directing the concerned respondent to finalize the Gradation List by taking into account all relevant facts. On consideration thereof, the second writ petition was disposed of with direction to the Respondent No.3 therein i.e. Director of Soil Conservation to take on record the grievances of the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law by a speaking order. Time granted for doing the needful was up to 30.09.2010. 3. On consideration thereof, the second writ petition was disposed of with direction to the Respondent No.3 therein i.e. Director of Soil Conservation to take on record the grievances of the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law by a speaking order. Time granted for doing the needful was up to 30.09.2010. 3. Following the order of this Court dated 26.08.2010, the Director of Soil Conservation, Assam passed a speaking order on 27.09.2010 holding that the cancellation of the officiating arrangement of the petitioner made by the Divisional Soil Conservation Officer, Nalbari stands. A representation came to be filed by the petitioner on 20.10.2010 indicating that the said speaking order dated 27.09.2010 had not been passed in accordance with the directions made by this Court in WP(C) 6999/2002. The said representation was answered by the impugned order dated 10.01.2011, affirming the stand of the earlier order dated 27.09.2010. It is under these circumstances, the present proceedings was initiated. 4. An additional fact brought to notice by Mr. Prasad is with regard to the Gradation List of Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior) as on 01.06.2007, which includes the name of the Respondent No.6. This aspect of the matter would gain significance while making reference to the affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the Respondent No.3. 5. Challenge made to the orders dated 27.09.2010 and 10.01.2011 are basically on the premises that while rendering the said orders, the directions contained in the order of this Court dated 26.08.2010 have been totally ignored. Referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by Respondent No.3, Mr. Prasad submits that it is also the case of the respondents that Respondent No.6 was junior to the petitioner and that the officiating promotion of the said Respondent No.6 as Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior) has not been approved by the Selection Committee. In this context, Mr. Prasad submits that whereas on one hand the officiating promotion of Respondent No.6 has not received approval of the Selection Committee, on the other his name has already been included in the Gradation List of Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior) as on 01.06.2007. 6. Mr. S.P. Choudhury, learned counsel representing the State respondents submits that the orders under challenge i.e. 27.09.2010 and 10.01.2011 had been passed in strict terms of the directions contained in the Court’s order dated 26.08.2010. 6. Mr. S.P. Choudhury, learned counsel representing the State respondents submits that the orders under challenge i.e. 27.09.2010 and 10.01.2011 had been passed in strict terms of the directions contained in the Court’s order dated 26.08.2010. Referring to the statements made in the affidavit-in-opposition, he admits that the Respondent No.6 is junior to the petitioner. He also submits, as would be apparent from paragraph 7 of the affidavit-in-opposition, the officiating promotion of Respondent No.6 is awaiting approval of the Selection Committee. 7. I have heard the learned counsel or the parties and have also perused the materials on record. This Court is of the view that the issue for adjudication lies in a narrow compass. What requires to be decided is as to whether the impugned orders dated 27.09.2010 and 10.01.2011 had been issued in terms of the directions of this Court dated 26.08.2010. For this purpose, reference is once again made to the order of this Court dated 26.08.2010 and the same is reproduced below: “The petitioner is aggrieved by the Annexure-4 letter dated 03.02.2001 by which his officiating promotion as Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior) was cancelled on the ground of being irregular. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the seniority position assigned to him in the cadre of Soil Conservation Overseer and Soil Conservation Field Worker. The gradation list was published on 08.03.1995 in which the petitioner was included at Sl No.488 while the respondent No.5 was included at Sl No.465. It appears that, the petitioner is also aggrieved by order dated 14.12.1998 by which the respondent No.5 was given officiating promotion as Soil Conservation Demonstrator. From the materials on record it appears that the petitioner had earlier preferred an appeal registered and numbered as Case No.45 ATA/2001 before the Assam Administrative Tribunal agitating his grievance. The appeal was disposed of by order dated 29.08.2001 directing the respondent No.3 to finalise the gradation list taking into account all relevant facts and thereafter deciding the matter relating to the claim of the petitioner for promotion. However, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that inspite of the said order passed by the Tribunal, the Director has not passed any order towards redressal of grievance of the petitioner. Although the writ petition was filed in the year 2002, the respondents have not filed any counter affidavit. I have heard Mr. L R Dutta along with Mr. Although the writ petition was filed in the year 2002, the respondents have not filed any counter affidavit. I have heard Mr. L R Dutta along with Mr. S B Pradsad, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R Chakraborty, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate. I have also perused the materials on record. Considering the matter in its entirety and having regard to the aforesaid order dated 29.08.2001 passed by the Tribunal the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.3 to take on record the grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate order strictly in accordance with law. The order must be a speaking one. Let the order be passed as expeditiously as possible but at any rate not later than 30th of September, 2010 failing which, it will be open for the petitioner to approach this Court for appropriate proceeding. Petitioner may obtain a certified copy of this order and produce the same before the respondent No.3 for his necessary followup action. Writ petition is disposed of.” 8. The first issue raised in WP(C) 6999/2002 was in respect of the order dated 03.02.2001, by which the officiating promotion granted to the petitioner as Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior) was cancelled. The second issue raised was with regard to the Gradation List dated 08.03.1995 wherein the petitioner was placed at Sl. No.488 and the Respondent No.6 at Sl. No.465. The third issue raised was with regard to the order dated 14.12.1998, by which the Respondent No.6 was granted officiating promotion as Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior). As evident from the said order of this Court dated 26.08.2010, the Director of Soil Conservation was required to pass a speaking order having regard to the grievances raised by the petitioner. This Court had also taken notice of the order dated 29.08.2001 passed by the Assam Administrative Tribunal in Case No.45 ATA/2001. 9. In the back-drop of the directions made by this Court, it appears from the impugned orders dated 27.09.2010 and 10.01.2011 that the second and the third issue raised in WP(C) 6999/2002 did not fall for any consideration/discussion. Only the first issue with regard to the cancellation order dated 03.02.2001 was answered. Apparently, the failure to consider and /or to pass a speaking order by taking into consideration the grievances raised by the petitioner goes to the root of the matter. Only the first issue with regard to the cancellation order dated 03.02.2001 was answered. Apparently, the failure to consider and /or to pass a speaking order by taking into consideration the grievances raised by the petitioner goes to the root of the matter. Under no circumstances the said orders dated 27.09.2010 and 10.01.2011 can be construed to have been passed in accordance with the directions of this Court dated 26.08.2010. Having held thus, the Court is left without option but to set aside and/or quash the orders dated 27.09.2010 and 10.01.2011 with further direction to the Respondent No.3 i.e. the Director of Soil Conservation, Assam to undertake a fresh exercise by way of answering the grievances raised by the petitioner, which finds mention in the order dated 26.08.2010 passed by this Court in WP(C) 6999/2002. Let the required exercise be completed within a period of 8(eight) weeks from today. Needless to say, that following the speaking order which is to be passed in terms of the directions above, appropriate steps with regard to the seniority position of both the petitioner as well as Respondent No.6 in the Gradation List be taken. The Respondent No.3 shall also answer to the challenge made to the order dated 14.12.1998 issued in favour of the Respondent No.6 giving him officiating promotion as Soil Conservation Demonstrator (Junior). 10. In the result, this writ petition stands allowed, however, without any order as to cost. A copy of this order be furnished to Mr. S.P. Choudhury during the course of the day.