WP(C) 2711/2003 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY The petitioners before this Court seek a direction to the respondents for releas e of their salary/ pay for the period 1.3.98 to 30.3.2001 during which they clai m to have rendered continuous service as English teachers in various Government L.P. Schools in the Bijni Sub-Division presently located within the territorial limits of Bodoland Territorial Council, Kokrajhar. I have heard Mr AR Sikdar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms M Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Bodoland Territorial Coucil (for short, here inafter referred to as ’the Council’). The petitioners claim that following a selection they were appointed as above under the New Education Policy adopted by the then Bodoland Autonomous Cou ncil. This was during 1997-98. They started rendering their services at the scho ols where they were posted. In between they were paid salary only for three mont hs i.e. December, 1997; January, 1998 and February, 1998. They also claim that a fter 30.3.2001 they were adjusted under the relevant Operation Black Board Schem e with effect from 31.3.2001. Inspite of the above as their salaries for the afo rementioned period have not been paid, they are before this Court for redress. The Council in its affidavit disputed the claim of the petitioners that they were appointed as English teacher. According to it, their appointment order s clearly indicate that they were appointed to act as such. The Council asserted that noticing that the appointments under the New Education Policy of the erstw hile Bodoland Territorial Council were being made against non-existent posts, th e same (New Education Policy) was cancelled by order dated 12.11.2004. The answ ering respondents also denied the petitioners’ claim of having been adjusted aga inst the Operation Black Board Scheme. Though Mr Sikdar has urged that on the basis of the appointments made th e petitioners were entitled to their salary/ remuneration for the rest of the pe riod spanning from 1.3.98 to 30.3.2001 except for the three months for which the y had received the same, on being queried by this Court he could not draw its at tention to any material to establish that their appointments had been preceded b y any selection contemplated under the relevant Rules. The fact that the New Edu cation Policy had been cancelled on the ground of appointment against non-existe nt posts has also not been denied by him. The documents appended to the writ pet ition also do not demonstrate in clear terms that the petitioners had been with effect from 31.3.2001 adjusted under the Operation Black Board Scheme. In the above view of the matter, having regard to the clear cut stand of the Council, this Court is not in a position to conclusively hold that the appo intments of the petitioners are valid in law. In that view of the matter, their claim simplicter of having rendered service for the aforementioned period, in th e opinion of this Court, does not entitle them to salary therefor. The petition in the above facts and circumstances being without any subs tance, is dismissed. No costs.