WP(C) 4884/2003 BEFORE HON’BLR MR JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY JUDGEMENT AND ORDER(ORAL ) The grievance registered is against the WT message dated 13.12. 2002 of the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Depar tment keeping in abeyance the adjustment orders pertaining to regularization of dropped/honorary teachers of the State including the petitioners. By order date d 24.6.2003 this Court while issuing notice had observed that the services of t he petitioners were regularized in terms of the orders passed in Civil Rule No. 3161/1995, WP( C) No.344/2001 and Writ Appeal No.474/97 for which the impugned W T message could not affect their service conditions. 2. I have heard Mr PK Goswami, Senior Advocate for the petitioners, M r MR Pathak, learned Standing counsel, Education Department and Mr D.Saikia, lea rned Standing counsel, Finance Department, for the respondents. 3. The pleaded case of the petitioners who were all Assistant Teacher s of different ME schools and ME Madrassas of the State is that ,following thei r exclusion from the process of regularization along with others similarly situa ted , the All Assam Middle English Teachers Association, Guwahati approached thi s Court with Civil Rule No.2833/1997 and pursued the issue in Writ Appeal No.474 /1997. By judgment and order dated 13.11.1998 passed in the Writ Appeal the se rvices of the petitioners along with others involved in the proceeding was direc ted to be regularized. Pursuant thereto, in different phases the services of 107 4 teachers were regularized by various orders. The names of the petitioners were included in the list of teachers appended to the letter dated 23.3.2002 of th e Principal Secretary to the Govt.of Assam, Education Department for such regula rization/provincialisation. In terms thereof and in compliance of the order date d 13.11.1998 of this Court the petitioners thereafter by order dated 1.10.2002 w ere regularised against vacant posts. Their salary however, was not paid and eve ntually by the impugned WT message the orders of their regularization were sus pended. 4. No counter has been filed by the authorities of the Education Dep artment. 5. Mr Goswami has maintained that the petitioners services having b een regularised /provincialised in compliance of the order dated 13.11.1998 of t his Court passed in Writ Appeal No.474/1997, they cannot in any view of the matt er, be brought within the purview of the impugned WT message and therefore they are entitled to a declaration to the said effect. As the decision contained in the WT message in the facts and circumstances of the case is wholly inapplicabl e to the petitioners, the same is liable to be quashed so far they are concerned . 6. The learned counsel for the State respondents did not dispute the re gularization/provincialisation of the petitioners services in compliance of the order dated 13.11.1998 of this Court passed in Writ Appeal No.474/1997. 7. The rival submissions have been duly considered. The uncontrover ted pleaded averments in the writ petition along with the documents appended the reto unequivocally demonstrate that the regularization/provincialisation of the petitioners’ services has been in compliance of the order dated 13.11.1998 pass ed by this Court in Writ Appeal No.474/1997. The operative portion of the above order of this Court is quoted hereinabove :- In view of the aforesaid developments, we dispose of this appeal with a direction that the process of regularization /provincialisation of 1123 teach ers dropped at the time of provincialisation of ME and ME Madrassas during the year 1991-92 would be completed within a period of 3 months from today. For the purpose of enabling the Government to complete the process of r egularization/provincialisation, the appellants association will furnish all ne cessary documents and particulars including names of concerned assistant teache rs to the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, within 2 weeks from today. I t will be open for the State Government to consider regularization/provincialis ation of Assistant teachers dropped at the time of provincialisation of ME and ME Madrassas during the year 1991-92 in addition to 1123 Assistant teachers i n case they find genuineness in the claims of such additional assistant teachers . It is clear from hereinabove that the direction to the State respondents to reg ularize/provincialise the services of 1123 teachers including the petitioners wa s based on an undertaking and/ or on conscious decision taken by them(state res pondents) to the said effect . The said order having remained unchallenged is t herefore binding on the parties. The respondent authorities having acted in ter ms of the order of this Court being fully aware of the implications thereof ar e now estopped from charting a different course to the prejudice of the p etitioners. Having regard to the background in which the petitioners services h ave been regularized, the irresistible conclusion is that the WT message dated 1 3.11.2002 is inapplicable to them and cannot be enforced to their detriment. 8. In the result, the said message vis a vis the petitioners is adjudg ed to be non est and is quashed. The interim order of this Court dated 24.6.200 2 is made absolute. The petition stands allowed. No costs.