WP(C) 1941/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA The prayer made in this writ petition is as follows: In the premises aforesaid Your Lordships humble petitioner most humbly prays that Your Lordships may be graciously pleased to admit the petitio ner, call for the records issue notice on the respondents to show cause as to wh y a writ in the nature of mandamus should not be issued directing the respondent s authority- i. to pay the salary of the petitioner for the period of fi ve months (from 22.8.84 to 23.1.85). ii. to regularize the service of the petitioner for these pe riod of five months iii. to fix the seniority of the petitioner with effect from 22.8.84 for all consequential benefit and/or after cause/causes being show, hearing the parties to mak e the rule absolute and/or to pass any other order/orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper. In the writ petition, the petitioner has mentioned about the sui t being Title Suit No. 99/1994 filed by her in the Court of learned Munsiff No. 1, Jorhat. The judgment and decree passed therein is dated 14.9.1994. By the sai d judgment and decree a declaration was made that the petitioner is entitled to receive salary for the period in question. Having regard to the fact that this writ petition is virtually f or execution of the aforesaid judgment and decree, this Court by orders dated 18 .5.2009 and 17.6.2009, while noticing the same, granted time to the learned coun sel for the petitioner to answer the question regarding maintainability of the w rit petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of the afo resaid judgment and decree, the petitioner has not been paid her salary for the period in question. According to him, since the prayer made in the writ petition is to regularize the said period with consequential seniority, the writ petitio n is maintainable. I am afraid such plea is not at all tenable. As per the aforesaid judgment and decree, the petitioner is enti tled to receive salary for the aforesaid period of 5 months, which will automati cally mean regularization of the said period of service with all consequential b enefits. Although the judgment and decree was passed way back in 1994, the petit ioner after waiting for long 15 years has filed the instant writ petition seekin g implementation of the said judgment and decree. I am of the considered opinion that the Writ Court cannot be reduced to an Executing Court for implementation of the judgment and decree passed by a Civil Court. The remedy of the petitioner lies elsewhere. I have heard Mr. B.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. S.K. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department. The writ petition is dismissed with the liberty to the petitione r to pursue such other remedy as may be available to her. Dismissal of the writ petition shall not be a bar for the respon dents to redress the grievance of the petitioner. However, no opinion is express ed in this regard.