WP(C) 481/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA . Heard Ms S. Seal, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. U.K. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner, who is presently serving as Assistant Teacher in the graduate scale of pay, has prayed for a direction t o the respondents to provide him with the salary in the time scale of pay instea d of fixed pay of Rs.2500/-. It appears that the petitioner had responded to the Annexurer-1 employment notice dated 28.12.1996 for appointment of Assistant Tea cher in the graduate scale pf pay. On being successful, he was appointed by Anne xure-2 order dated 30.3.2001 in the scale of Rs.3580 to 8750/-. However, when sa lary was not paid, he had approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.3799/2003. T he writ petition was disposed of by order dated 23.5.2003 with the direction to examine his case for release of salary. Thereafter by Annexure-4 order dated 24 .3.2005, the salary of the petitioner was released at a fixed pay of Rs.2500/- i nstead of making the payment of salary in the time scale of pay. Being aggrieve d, this writ petition has been filed praying for payment of salary in the time s cale of pay. In the counter affidavit filed by the Respondent No.2, it has been state d that although the Government had cleared only 71 posts by order dated 26.3.200 1 for appointment as Assistant Teacher inb High Schools in Nagaon district but t he then Inspector of Schools, Nagaon District Circle, Nagaon vide order dated 31 .3.2001 appointed as many as 251 candidates along with the petitioner. According to the respondents, the petitioner being an excess appointee, could not be paid salary in the time scale of pay and thus, the arrangement was made for payment of salary at a fixed pay of Rs. 2500/-. By Annexure-R/2 letter dated 18.2.2009, the Director of Secondary Educat ion, Assam had submitted a proposal to the Government for allowing payment of sa lary in the time scale of pay for such appointees. In paragraph 11 of the counte r affidavit, it has been stated that no proposal for release of arrear salary to the petitioner has been received from the Government. It has been stated that such proposal for releasing arrear salary is required to be submitted as per the guidelines of the Finance Department. However, in absence of any proposal from the Head of the institution through the Inspector of Schools, Nagaon District Ci rcle, no action could be taken. If the petitioner and other such appointees had been appointed in excess of the allotted posts, the authorities will have to make out an action plan on the basis of the merit list. Instead, what they have done is that the salary has been provided to such excess appointees, however, not in the time scale of pay but on consolidated basis, which is Rs.2500/-. The tenor of the affidavit filed by the Respondent No.2 is that nothing could be done in the matter in absence of any proposal for releasing arrear salary. Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved, it is imperative on the part of the Government in the Education Department to take a decision in the matter. However, the Government has not filed any counter affidavit and thus , it is not discernible as to what is the stand of the Government in the matter. Considering the matter in its entirety, this writ petition is disposed o f directing the Government in the Education Department to take a decision in the matter consistently with the rules. Such decision shall be taken as expeditious ly as possible, preferably within 4 (four) months. Writ petition is disposed of.