been appointed by the Managing Committees of their schools subsequent to the provincialisation thereof is a matter of record. The pleaded case of the petitioners is that they had been so appointed after the provincialization of their institutions. Their initial appointment therefore had not been in accordance with the provisions of the Rules. Not only their appointment letters are not on record, it is admitted as well on their part that their selection under the education policy of the then BAC had not been approved by the concerned authorities as mentioned therein.

- 11. This Court by order dated 13.12.2002 passed in Misc Case No. 1689/2002 in WP (C) No. 542/2002 had only directed consideration of their cases for regularization in accordance with the relevant Government policy. No direction for regularization of their services was made without reference to the attendant facts and the rules otherwise applicable. It is not the case of the petitioners that the prescriptions of the Rules do not apply to them.

12. That the petitioners, except Nira Basumatary and Shyamlal Khaklary had been appointed by the Managing Committees of the schools after the provincialization thereof, had been noticed by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Department in his letter dated 04.08.2006 whereby, the issue was laid with the BTC for taking necessary action as per the existing rules. The same view was iterated by this authority in his order dated 02.03.2007. In the teeth of the above, the order dated 26.06.2007 of the Director of Education, BTC, Kokrajhar regularizing the services of all the petitioners as well as the approval accorded by the Finance Department of the State per se do not remedy the infirmity in the appointment of the petitioners at the first instance. This Court in a Division Bench in the case of Abdul Bari (MD.) (supra) while decided against the regularization of the services of the incumbents selected and appointed in violation of the provisions of Assam Secondary Education (Provincialised) Service Rules, 1982, a Hon'ble Single Judge in the case of Jahangir Alam and Ors. (supra) held the same view vis a vis, the Assam Elementary Education (Provincialization) Rules, 1977. In this decided case, the petitioners therein had been appointed in different LP/ME/MV/High/Higher secondary schools by the Managing Committees thereof after the institutions had been provincialised. The decision of the Apex Court in U. P. State Electricity Board (supra) is clearly distinguishable on facts. The petitioners therein were daily wage employees of a Cooperative Electricity Supply Society. The society had been taken over by the U. P. State Electricity Board and it was decided that the daily wage employees of the society who were being taken over by the Board would start working under it in the same manner and position. The Board thus had taken a decision to regularize the services of its employees working on daily wage basis. No requirement of compliance of any statutory rules as an indispensable prerequisite for regularization of the services was involved. 13. On a totality of all considerations as recited hereinabove, this Court is of the unhesitant opinion that the challenge to the impugned orders lacks substance. The petition therefore is dismissed. The respondent authorities however would take necessary steps for regularization of the services of the petitioner Nos. 9 and 10, namely, Smti. Nira Basumatary and Shri Shyamlal Khaklary without undue delay with all consequential