MANIK BORO Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None appears for the petitioner when the matter is called upon for hearing. Shri A Deka, learned counsel appears for respondent Nos.1, 2, 5 and 6 and Ms. KM Talukdar for respondent Nos.3 and 4. None appears for respondent No.7.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners that pursuant to an advertisement dated 01.11.1997 published under the signature of the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Mangaldai for filing up the vacant posts of L.P. school teachers under the Mangaldai Sub-Division, the petitioners had submitted their application alongwith other necessary testimonials. Accordingly, the petitioners were allotted serial Nos.46, 49, 51 and 124 and they appeared in the test and interview held by the respondent authorities. After interview held on 26.05.1998 by the Mangaldai Sub-Divisional Level Advisory Board, under BAC, the names of the petitioners were approved by the said Advisory Board by its resolution No.9. Accordingly, the petitioners were appointed in L.P. school alongwith other selected candidates.

(3.) Since being so appointed, the petitioners have been discharging their duties regularly and efficiently without any complaint from any quarter and without any break. As per the appointment order of the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to the payment of salary amounting to Rs. 1800/- per month. It is the further case of the petitioner that while they have been discharging their duties, the Director of Education, BTC by a show-cause notice dated 04.09.2007 asked the petitioners to show-cause as to why their services should not be terminated. It is the further case of the petitioner that pursuant to the said show-cause notice, the petitioners had duly replied to the show cause notice that the petitioners were appointed as primary school teacher in 1999 by the then Deputy Inspector of School's Mangaldai as per Rules and as such, they should not be terminated from service.