WP(C) 6120/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. M. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. MR Pathak, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department. The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure-P/6 communication dated 29.4.2010 made to her by the School Managing Committee intimating dispensation o f her service as per resolution No. 2 of the School Managing Committee meeting h eld on 22.4.2010. As per the own admission of the petitioner, she could not atte nd her duty from the beginning of 2008. However, according to her, she was suffe ring from various ailments. There is nothing to indicate as to whether any intim ation was furnished to the School Managing Committee to that effect. Be that as it may, admittedly the school is not a provincialised one, but a privately manag ed one. Nothing has been shown in the writ petition that the school is under any pervasive control of the Governmental authority. The appointment and terminatio n of service of the petitioner is by the School Managing Committee. In such a si tuation, the objection raised by Mr. MR Pathak, learned Standing Counsel, Educat ion Department that the writ petition is not maintainable is accepted. The Schoo l Managing Committee, whose action is under challenge cannot be said to an autho rity within the meaning of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. However, i t will be open for the petitioner to pursue such other legal remedy as may be av ailable to her.