WP(C) 5730/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA. Heard Mr. B. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mrs. M. Gogoi Medhi, learned Standing Counsel, Education. The petitioner is aggrieved by non-payment of salary from January 2009. It appears that the Treasury Officer, Hailakandi by his Annexure-7 letter dated 26.2.2009 addressed to the District Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi had intimated about the difficulties in payment of salary to the petitioner and oth er such similarly situated teachers. According to the said letter, the petitione r and others mentioned therein could not have been transferred as the posts bein g held by them were personal to them. Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the p etitioner has drawn my attention to the order dated 21.7.2010 passed by this Cou rt in WP(C) No.4632/2009 (Ratna Rani Dey v. State of Assam & Ors) under similar circumstances. He submits that a similar order/direction may be issued in terms of the said order as per Annexure-’A’ order dated 27.3.2009 annexed to the addit ional affidavit. Considering the matter in its entirety, this writ petition is disposed o f directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for payment o f salary as well as her retention in the present place of posting, if admissible under the law. Alternatively, the petitioner will have to carry out Annexure-’A ’ order dated 27.3.2009 entitling her to receive salary both arrear and current. The authority may consider the case of the petitioner sympathetically for her r etention in the present place of posting by way of making necessary adjustment, if practicable and permissible. Once the aforesaid exercise is carried out as ex peditiously as possible preferably within two months, the petitioner may be paid her due salary. With the aforesaid directions, writ petition is disposed of.