WA 85/2007 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE D. BISWAS, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. SARMA The unsuccessful writ petitioner in W.P.(C) No.477/07 has filed this wri t appeal challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 31.1.2007 passed by t he Writ Court. 2. We have heard Mr. A.S. Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the appella nt and also Mr. VM Thomas, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondents No .1, 2 and 3 and Dr. Y.K. Phukan, learned senior counsel for Respondent No.4. 3. There is a dispute going on between the appellant and the Respondent No. 4 with regard to their inter-se seniority in service as Assistant Teacher. This seniority requires to be determined by the authority which will eventually deter mine the entitlement of any one of them to hold the post of Headmaster of Lanka High School, in the District of Nagaon where they are serving now. On earlier oc casion in W.P.(C) No.2018/2004, the respondent No.4 challenged an order allowing the present appellant to hold the current charge of the post of Headmaster of t he said School. The said writ petition was finally terminated vide judgment and order dated 2.11.2006. The learned Writ Court while disposing the writ petition, in the concluding paragraph held as follows :- In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that it will be ap propriate for the Govt. to decide the matter relating to seniority between the p etitioner and the respondent No.4. To facilitate the same, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Commissioner and Secretary, Secondary Educatio n, Assam to determine the seniority between the petitioner and the Respondent no .4 in accordance with the then existing Rules, 1982. He will bear in mind that t he petitioner has already been promoted to the next higher grade of Assistant He admistress, Pursuant to her selection, the seniority shall be determined as expe ditiously as possible preferably within three months from today after providing all reasonable opportunities of being heard to both the parties i.e. the petitio ner and the respondent No.4. Till then, status quo as on today, shall be maintai ned. . 4. While in terms of the aforesaid direction, the seniority was required to be decided by the Commissioner and Secretary, Education Department, Assam, the appellant was put under suspension by the competent authority on 16.9.2006. It i s stated at the Bar that after suspension, the appellant handed over the charge of the Headmaster of the School to the Respondent No.4 on 19.9.2006. Thereafter, the authority vide order dated 20.12.2006 reinstated the appellant in his post pending finanisation of the departmental proceedings. However, after service of the order dated 2.11.2006 passed in W.P.(C) No.2018/2004, the order of reinstate ment so passed by the Inspector of Schools, Nagaon (NDC) was kept in abeyance an d the same is stated to have been passed in pursuance of the direction of the Hi gh Court passed in W.P.(C) No.2018/2004. The grievance of the appellant is that in the said judgment nowhere it has been directed that the appellant be kept und er suspension pending decision regarding the seniority to be determined by the G overnment, as directed by the Writ Court. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. We have als o carefully perused the order dated 2.11.2006 passed in W.P.(C) No.2018/2004. A bare perusal of the aforesaid order leaves no manner of doubt that the status-qu o was directed to be maintained by the learned Writ Court till finalization of t he dispute between the parties relating to holding of the post of In-charge Head master of the School and it does not extend to the service career of the appella nt. It is for the disciplinary authority to decide whether to keep the appellant under suspension or not after putting him on suspension and, on such considerat ion, the Inspector of Schools reinstated the petitioner on 20.12.2006. Under no stretch of imagination, the order of the High Court can be interpreted to mean a nd contain a direction that the appellant be kept under suspension, till determi nation of the seniority. 6. It is stated at the Bar that although the seniority of the appellant and the Respondent No.4 was directed to be decided within a period of two months, t he same has not yet been decided. Mr. VM Thomas, learned Standing Counsel submit s that the matter is at the hearing stage by the authorities concerned. In that view of the matter, it is again directed that the respondent authority, namely, the Commissioner and Secretary, Secondary Education, Assam shall determine the s eniority between the appellant and the Respondent No.4 as early as possible and at any rate at a date not later than one month from today. After such determinat ion regarding the seniority of the contesting parties, an appropriate order shal l also be passed regarding holding of the post of the Headmaster of the School. 7. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the impugned order dat ed 17.1.2007 keeping in abeyance of the reinstatement order of the appellant sta ted to have been passed in pursuance of the order of the High Court passed in W. P.(C) No.2018/2004 has been passed in misinterpretation of the order passed in t he said writ petition which is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, we quash the i mpugned order dated 17.1.2007 passed by the Inspector of Schools, NDC. 8. With the aforesaid modification and direction of the order passed by the learned Writ Court, this writ appeal stands disposed of. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTG.) ISINGH