WP(C) 235/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE U.B. SAHA.. The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner for a direction to the resp ondents for releasing his pay and salary on and from March,2007 onwards along wi th all other outstanding benefits, to which he is entitled to in accordance with law and also to provide him necessary retention to the post of Lower Division A ssistant (in short L.D.A) held by the petitioner in the Bartala High School, Nal bari, where he is at present working. Heard Mr. D.K.Kotoky, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr . M.R. Pathak, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department, who in his turn, submits that at the motion stage, the writ petition can be disposed of taking no te of the case of Sudhendu Mohan Talukdar & Ors. v. State of Assam & Ors, report ed in (2006) 2 GLT 216, wherein this Court, particularly in paragraphs 19 and 20 of the said law report held that a committee was constituted as the matter is r elating to non-payment of salaries and also appointment of the petitioner. While Mr. Kotoky, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Sudhendu Moha n Talukdar (supra) is a case relating to non-payment of salary of the teachers a nd not to L.D.A. like the petitioner. Therefore, the said decision is not appli cable to this case. The brief facts needed to be discussed are as follows. The petitioner Sri Chakra dhar Barman joined the Bartala High School as L.D.A. in view of the order dated 29.12.2003 and he was allowed to draw his salaries as L.D.A. till May, 2001 but all on a sudden, from the month of June, 2001, he has been deprived of his salar y and being aggrieved, the petitioner also filed a writ petition being WP(C) No. 2613/2002 and this Court, after hearing the parties on 16.7.2002, directed the D irector of Secondary Education, Assam to issue necessary order regarding the ret ention of the post held by the petitioner and also to release monthly salaries t o him. After the order of this Court, as stated supra, the Respondent No.3 issu ed an order on 10.3.2002 in sanctioning and re-allocating the fund for pay and a llowances to the petitioner from July, 2001 to November, 2002 and as per the sai d order, the monthly salaries of the petitioner have been paid to him regularly till the month of February,2007 but again from March, 2007 till date, the petiti oner is deprived of getting his salary though he is entitled to, in accordance w ith law. Mr. Kotoky, learned counsel for the petitioner, urging for release of the monthl y salary, submits that the action of the respondents for non-payment of salary f rom 2001 to 2007 had proved that the petitioner was appointed to hold the post o f L.D.A. and consequent thereto, they also allowed to draw salaries till Februar y,2007, which indicates that the petitioner’s appointment was valid one. Unless the same was valid, why the authority concerned paid him salary from 2001 to 200 7. So, in this case, it is not necessary to send back the matter to the committe e constituted as mentioned in paragraph 19 and 20 of the judgment in Sudhendu Mo han Talukdar (supra). Rather, it would be proper for this Court to direct the Se cretary to the Government of Assam in the Education Department to enquire into t he genuineness of the petitioner’s appointment and ultimately, if it is found th at there is no irregularity in the appointment of the petitioner then, the respo ndents should make payment of arrear salary for 46 (forty six) months till Decem ber,2010. Mr. Pathak, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department, while countering the submission of Mr. Kotoky, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the committee constituted is not only for the teachers but the committee consti tuted as mentioned in paragraph 19 and 20 of the judgment in Sudhendu Mohan Talu kdar (supra) is only for the Stipendiary Teachers but also for the Grade-III and Grade-IV staff of the Government schools and provincialized schools. Therefore, it cannot be said that the decision in the judgment of this Court is not applic able to this case. This Court has also gone through paragraph 20 in the case of Sudhendu Mohan Talukdar (supra) wherein it is stated inter alia, that Mr. Choud hury, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Education Department has submitted that in fact, a committee has already been constituted with the Commissioner and Secr etary, Education Department, Director of Secondary Education as well as Elementa ry Education, Senior Financial Advisor, Education Department with Under Secretar y Education Department as Member Secretary for the purpose of going into the app ointments of the stipendiary teachers and also the reasons for non-payment of s alaries/stipend to such persons, by issuing notification dated 9.3.2006, in ter ms of the order passed in another batch of writ petitions. According to this Cou rt, the submission of Mr. Choudhury, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Education Department, who was appearing in Sudhendu Mohan Talukdar case (supra) is that th e said committee was constituted for going into the appointments of the stipendi ary teachers and also the reasons for non-payment of salaries/stipend. Therefor e, according to this Court, the submission of Mr. Kotoky, learned counsel for th e petitioner has some force. However, it would be better to direct the Responden t No.1 to enquire about the grievance of the petitioner and if it is found that the committee, as mentioned in paragraphs 20 and 21 of Sudhendu Mohan Talukdar ( supra), is constituted even for the Grade-III and Grade-IV staffs of the Governm ent and Government Salaried schools then, the Commissioner-cum-Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Secondary Education Department is at liberty to send the matter to the committee for examining the grievance of the petitioner. But i t is made clear that if the committee is not constituted for the purpose of exam ining the appointment and non-payment of salary of Grade-III and Grade-IV staffs , then the same should not be sent to the said committee. Rather, the Commission er-cum-Secretary, department of Secondary Education shall enquire into, through an officer as he thinks fit to examine the grievance of the petitioner and pass necessary reasoned orders on the basis of the said report providing opportunity to the petitioner of being heard. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order , as the petitioner is admittedly going to retire on 31st January,2011. The Comm issioner-cum-Secretary to the Government of Assam, department of Secondary Educa tion shall also consider the fact that a person be given his salary by the autho rity to maintain his livelihood and non-payment of salary itself is violation of right to life, which includes livelihood and in the instant case, the petitione r is definitely going to retire on 31st January,2011. Unless he is getting his admitted dues then, he had to face starvation and unless his initial appointment is made settled at an earlier date, he is also deprived of pension available un der the law. The petitioner is also further directed to furnish a certified copy of this orde r along with copy of the writ petitioner and its enclosures to the Commissioner- cum-Secretary to the Government of Assam, Secondary Education Department within a period of 7 (seven) days from today. With the aforesaid order, the instant writ petition is disposed of.