Anima Hazarika, J.

1. Review of the judgment and order dated 08.05.2007 passed in WP(C) No. 7872/2003 as well as judgment and order dated 13.08.2009 passed in WP(C) No. 4585/2008 by the learned Single Judge have been sought for in these review petitions. Vide judgment and order dated 8.5.2007 passed in WP(C) No. 7872/2003 this court while allowing the writ petition, at paragraph 7 i.e. at the concluding paragraph of the judgment has made it clear that the appointment of the petitioner in the post of lecturer in Economics in the Kharupetia College be treated as approved with effect from 25.03.1998, however, the petitioner would get the necessary financial benefit only from the date of his approval and vide order dated 13.08.2009 passed in WP(C) No. 4585/2008, the court while clarifying the above order has held that the approval of the petitioner for the post was actually granted on 06.01.2003 and accordingly, the petitioner would be entitled to get his arrear salary from the said date i.e. 06.01.2003 and not from the date as mentioned in the impugned order dated 10.10.2008 whereby and whereunder the Director of Higher Education, Assam allowed the petitioner to draw arrear salary with effect from 12.06.2007 i.e. from the date of the order dated 12.06.2007 and not from 25.03.1998.

2. Conjoint reading of the above two orders i.e. the order dated 08.05.2007 and 13.08.2009 would show that the order dated 13.08.2009 is a fall out of the observations made and directions given vide judgment and order dated 08.05.2007. Hence, both the review petitions are heard analogously and being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

3. Due to denial of benefits from the date of taking over the college under deficit grants-in-aid by the respondents on 25.03.1998, the petitioner had approached the court to ameliorate injustice caused to him in preference to others. The petitioner had approached this court on earlier occasion by filing different writ petitions on being aggrieved by the actions of the college authority. However, the facts of the earlier writ petitions and the order passed thereon, if narrated, herein, it would burden the disposal of the review petition and hence this court would choose to refer the orders passed in the writ petition whereby review have been sought for.

4. Admittedly the petitioner was appointed as a lecturer in Kharupetia College and he joined in the department of Economics on 15.09.1995. At that time it was a venture College and it was brought under the deficit system of grants-in-aid with effect from 25.03.1998. The concerned authority sanctioned three posts of lecturer in the Economics Department. However, the Governing Body of the college recommended names of two persons who were senior to the petitioner, leaving 3rd post vacant. The name of the petitioner was not forwarded by the Governing Body of the College though he was duly qualified under the UGC norms having secured more than 64 % marks which culminated in filing the writ petition being WP(C) No. 5000/1999 whereby the court vide order dated 05.03.2002 disposed of the writ petition directing the Governing Body of the college to recommend the name of the suitable candidates considering the case of the petitioner for the 3rd post of Economics in the college to the government. However, the governing body of the college suspended the petitioner on 03.03.2000 the petitioner for alleged unauthorized absence on 16.02.2000 and the said order of suspension was put under challenge before this court being WP(C) No. 1402/2000 and the Court on 05.03.2002 quashed the suspension order giving liberty to proceed against the petitioner departmentally. However the Governing Body of the College chose not to proceed against him.

5. Thereafter, the Governing Body of the college in pursuance of the order of the court in WP(C) No. 5000/1999 adopted the following resolution on 05.10.2002 in the following terms:-

Resolution 9;

The meeting has thoroughly discussed the judgmen