WP(C) 6183/2005 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY Heard Mr.H.A.Sarkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner. The respond ents are represented by Mr.U.K.Goswami, the learned Standing Counsel, Education Department. 2. The petitioner has superannuated from service in July, 2011. He was the founder teacher of the Kanaklata L.P.School, but subsequently, he was transfe rred to Bishnupally Adarsha Prathmik Vidyalaya, Hojai on 21.3.1996. The petition er was re-posted at the Kanaklata L.P.School on 8.6.1996 (Annexure-J), from whi ch he eventually retired . 3. While the petitioner was serving as teacher, a deportation notice was se rved against the petitioner and his family on 4.8.1979 by the Superintendent of Police, Nogaon and eventually the petitioner was deported from Assam. He then to ok shelter in the house of his relative at Jalpaiguri, in West Bengal. But when it was found out that the petitioner is an Indian citizen, the deportation order was recalled and accordingly the petitioner returned back to Assam. 4. As the petitioner was not reinstated in service, he filed a writ petitio n i.e. Civil Rule No. 1611/89 and this Court by its judgment dated 15.3.1994 all owed the writ petition by directing that the petitioner should be taken back into service and shall also be paid 25% of the back wages. 5. In pursuant to the court’s order , the petitioner was reinstated as a t eacher on 21.3.1996 (Annexure-I) in the Bishnupally Adarsha Prathmik Vidyalaya, Hojai in a resignation vacancy. But since no steps was taken by the authorities to release the arrear dues, the present petition has been filed for release of the unpaid salary and back wages. According to the petitioner, he is entitled t o arrear salary for 6 years and 16 days from 1.4.1990 to 16.4.1996 and back wage s @ 25% for 10 years 2 months from 1.2.1980 to 31.3.1990. 6. Mr.U.K.Goswami, the learned Standing Counsel refers to the counter affid avit filed on 9.9.2011 to show that the authorities have taken steps to address the claim of the petitioner on a priority basis and currently the service book o f the petitioner is being up dated. The departmental counsel further submits th at once the formalities are complete, the dues of the petitioner can be paid in about three months time. 7. Bearing in mind the Department’s stand and reading the judgment dated 15 .3.94(Annexure G) passed in favour of the petitioner in the earlier writ petitio n i.e Civil Rule No. 1611/89, I feel that time should be granted to the responde nts to clear the arrear dues owed to the petitioner. Since the processing of the claim may take about three months as is submitted by Mr.Goswami, the respondent s are directed to expeditiously complete all the formalities so that the dues of the petitioners can be released on or before 31.3.2012. It is ordered according ly. 8. With the aforesaid direction the case is disposed of.