JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL) : Heard Mr. K.A Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.S. Roy, learned Senior Additional Government Advocate. 2. The petitioner is presently the President of Dullabcherra Gaon Panchayat in the Karimganj district and is also the Secretary of the karimganju District Congress (I) Committee. He also contested in the last Assembly Election, but he had lost the same. It is stated that the South Karimganj Constituency from which the petitioner had contested the assembly election falls in Karimganj district and is commonly known to be an area of anti-social activities and several hardcore criminals and dacoits are active in the area resulting in criminal activities like kidnapping, extortion, robbery, murder etc. It is the case of the petitioner that because of his standing in the society being a President of the Gaon Panchayat and also a person, who had contested the assembly election, although he had lost, the petitioner is exposed to certain threats to his life in course of his daily activities. Consequently, the petitioner was allotted with a PSO earlier. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondents as reveals from the command certificate, which is annexed as Annexure-11A page-34 to the writ petition to the effect that the concerned PSO who was earlier allotted to the petitioner, had been withdrawn. 4. The State respondents through the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Border, Karimganj had filed an affidavit in opposition dated 20.08.2016, wherein in para-8, it had been stated that although the petitioner was provided with a PSO earlier, but the same had been withdrawn after review of his present threat perception, which is required to be done periodically in respect of all such protectees. On the basis of the threat perception, the State Security Review Committee of Assam had taken a decision to withdraw the PSO earlier allotted to the petitioner. 5. But the writ petitioner through an Interlocutory Application being I.A (Civil) No.741/2016 had enclosed a letter, which he had written to the Superintendent of Police, Karimganj on 02.07.2016. In the said letter, the Officer-in-Charge of Ratabari Police Station had given a note that the petitioner has constant threat from the miscreants and during investigation, it was learnt that there are constant threats to the life of the petitioner as well as his family members and the writ petitioner cannot proceed to his home due to such threat. In the said letter, the Officer-in-Charge of Ratabari Police Station had given a note that the petitioner has constant threat from the miscreants and during investigation, it was learnt that there are constant threats to the life of the petitioner as well as his family members and the writ petitioner cannot proceed to his home due to such threat. In the said letter of 02.07.2016, the petitioner had informed the Superintendent of Police that because of the threat perception that he may be killed at any moment, the petitioner is staying within the premises of the police station. 6. Without expressing any view on the merit of the claim of the petitioner as well as the note forwarded by the Officer in Charge of Ratabari Police Station, it is noticed that the affidavit had been field by the concerned Deputy Superintendent of Police on 20.08.2017 and from the affidavit it is not clear as to whether the Review Committee had taken into consideration the aforesaid note of the Officer in Charge of Ratabari Police Station. 7. In such view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent authorities that the claim of the petitioner for allotment of a PSO be once again placed before the State Security Review Committee along with the note of the Officer in Charge of Ratabari Police Station and upon considering the same, pass a reasoned speaking order thereon. 8. The aforesaid exercise be carried out within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In terms of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of.