WP(C) 6402/2006 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K.SHARMA Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah as well as Mr. A.C. Borbora, learned Sr. counsel a ssisted by their respective juniors namely, Mr. A.D. Choudhury and Mr. M.G. Sing h, learned counsel for the petitioners. I have also heard Mr. D. Das, learned S r. Standing Counsel, Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) along with Ms. M. Bordol oi, learned Standing Counsel, BTC. Mr. M.K. Misra, learned Standing Counsel rep resents the Education Department, Government of Assam. This batch of writ petitions pertaining to termination of services of th e petitioners as Assistant Teachers and Grade-IV employees in M.E. and L.P. Scho ols, has been filed praying for setting aside and quashing of the impugned order s of termination and payment of salary. It is the case of the petitioners that their services could not have been terminated by identical orders of termination , which according to them, depict total non-application of mind. It is the further case of the petitioners that while some of the petitio ners have been paid their salary, but some have not been paid. Upon a reference to the communication made by the authorities of the B.T.C., the petitioners ass ert that the respondents cannot make any distinction relating to payment of sala ry in respect of the cases, in which the stay orders are operating and in respec t of cases where there is no stay order. It is the case of the petitioners that irrespective of stay orders passed, all the petitioners have been continuing in their respective services. Mr. Das, learned Standing counsel, B.T.C., on the other hand, submits th at the petitioners having been appointed irregularly, their services were rightl y terminated. However, he fairly submits that it would have been prudent, had t he petitioners been served with show cause notices asking them to show cause as to why their services would not be terminated. As regards the payment of salary , Mr. Das, learned Standing Counsel, B.T.C. submits that the B.T.C. authority ha s written to the Government of Assam for providing budgetary allocation for paym ent of salary to the petitioners, who have not been paid their salary in absence of the same. In view of the above submission and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, this batch of writ petitions is disposed of with the following directions:- (1) The impugned orders pertaining to termination of services of the pet itioners shall stand set aside and quashed. However, it is made clear that no o pinion is expressed regarding the merits of the rights and contents of either of the parties. The impugned orders have been set aside and quashed on the technic al grounds of non-issuance of notices and/or violation of the principles of natu ral justice. (2) It will be open for the B.T.C. authority to deal with the matters in accordance with law. However, no adverse orders shall be passed against the pe titioners without providing opportunity of being heard. (3) The petitioners, who have not been paid their salary for the period of services they have rendered; shall be paid their salary seeking budgetary all ocation of which, the B.T.C. authority has already written to the Government. N ecessary budget sanction shall be provided by the Government to the B.T.C. towar ds payment of admissible salary to the petitioners, who have not been paid their salary. It is made clear that such payment of salary to the petitioners will n ot be dependant on the interim order passed by this Court, meaning thereby, that irrespective of interim order passed, the petitioners shall be paid their salar y. This is in tune with the interim order passed on 15.12.2006 in W.P. (C) No.6 064/2006. With the above directions, the writ petitions are disposed of.