Full Judgment
Amitava Roy, J.
1. These two writ petitions involve similar questions of law and facts and as such they are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.
2. I have heard Mr. R. C. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No, 2039 of 2001 and Mr. D. Saikia learned counsel on behalf of respondent No. 5 and petitioner in WP(C) No. 191/02. Mr. Bhuyan, learned counsel appears on behalf of the Governing Body of the Bazera Anchalik College and the Principal-cum-Secretary thereof. Mr. C. Goswami, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of Mr. Tarun Deka, ex-President of the Bazera Anchalik College and Mr. K. C. Mahanta, learned State counsel represented the State respondents.
3. Smt. Geetima Kumar, petitioner in WP(C) 2039/01 is before this Court being aggrieved by the action of the college authority in not putting her name before the State authorities for her regular appointment in Grade-Ill post of the said College, though she has been serving the College, according to her, without any break from 11.3.1996, She has prayed for a mandamus for directing the respondents to appoint her in a Grade-Ill post preferably in the post of Library Assistant in the College on regular basis.
4. Shri Bishoy Kumar, writ petitioner in WP(C) No. 191/02 has sought to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court being aggrieved by the WT Message dated 30.3.2001 whereby disbursement of his pay has been withheld. According to him, he had been promoted to the post of Library Assistant with effect from 19.12.1993 and his service was regularised with effect from 1.2.2001 vide order dated 17.2.2001 issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam.
5. In course of hearing, Mr. Saikia has produced a copy of the communication No. B(3) S - 355/99/pt/117 dated 31.3.2001 issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Department addressed to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam wherefrom.it appears that the Government has allotted 227 posts in different Colleges including the College involved in the instant proceeding subject to the conditions as mentioned therein. The accompanying Chart indicates that one post of L. D. Assistant in the College has been sanctioned against the name of Gitima Kumar, Writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 2039/01. It has been submitted at the Bar that she is presently continuing in the post of L. D. Assistant in the said College in terms of the communication dated 31.3.2001 as referred above.
6. Mr. R.C. Saikia, while referring to the communication dated 27.1.2003 issued by the Principal of the College had addressed to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam has contended that it would transpire therefrom that the petitioner has been serving in the College with effect from 11.3.1996 without any break. The learned counsel further submits that in spite of the above, the petitioner has not been regularised in her service and she has not been paid her pay and allowances, to which she is entitled.
7. In view of the arrangement now made by the Government as contained in the communication dated 31.3,2001 and taking note of the fact that the petitioner had been accommodated in terms of the decision of the Government referred to above one petition is disposed of without entering into the controversy on merits. In the above premises, without going into the merits of the case, the writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam to examine the claim of the petitioner, Smt. Geetima Kumar relating to her pay and allowances and other service benefits to which she is entitled in law and if she is found entitled to the same, the said authority would release her the said benefits forthwith, The above exercise should be conducted without affecting the Writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 191/02.
8. At this juncture, Mr. D. Saikia, informs this Court that the respondent No. 5 Bishoy Kumar, has been receiving his pay and allowances regularly and that he has no grievance in this regard. In that view of the matter, the impugned WT Message dated 30.3.2001 has become non est in law.
9. As the petitioner Ms. Geetima Kumar has a long standing grievance, it is further directed that the above mentioned authority would complete the exercise, indicated hereinabove, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
With the above observations and directions the petitions are disposed.
No costs.