I.A. Ansari, J. - (1.) THE review petitioners were respondents in W.P. (C) No. 4107/2010 with the opposite party No. 1 herein as the petitioner therein. I have heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, appearing on behalf of the review petitioners, and Mr. H. Talukdar, learned counsel, for the writ petitioner - opposite party.
(2.) WITH the help of this review petition, the review petitioners seek review of the order, dated 06.08.2010, passed, in W.P. (C) No. 4107/2010. The respondents' prayer for review is resisted by the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 4107/2010. Before I turn to the question as to whether the order, dated 06.08.2010, passed, in W.P. (C) No. 4107/2010, needs to be reviewed and, if so, what would be the result of the review, it is appropriate that the observations made, and the directions contained, in the order, which is the subject -matter of review, be taken note of.
(3.) WITH the above end in view, the relevant portion of the order, dated 06.08.2010, passed, in W.P. (C) No. 4107/2010, is reproduced below: Considering the fact that the petitioner's case is same as the ones, which were covered by the order, dated 21.05.2008, aforementioned, this writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner's husband, for one day, by creating superannuary post and, then, take further action, in terms of the Office Memorandum, dated 20.05.2009, aforementioned, enabling the petitioner receive pension and pensionary benefits. The whole exercise, so directed, shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the respondent No. 3, namely, Chief Engineer (R&B), Public Works Department, Government of Assam. Furnish a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the respondents.;