- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE petitioner has approached this Court in the present writ application for payment of salary for the period from June 1994 to June, 1997 and thereafter from August, 1997 till the date of termination of her service i.e. on 13th November, 2000. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that three Assistant Teachers including the petitioner were terminated from service vide order passed on 30th November, 2000. Two of them had also approached this Court against the order of termination, namely, Kalpana Kumari in W.P.(S) No. 5510 of 2003 and Binco Eren Bara in W.P.(S) No. 7747 of 2006. Learned Single Judge, however, refused to interfere in the order of termination on account of the fact that the appointment of the petitioner had been made by authority who was not competent to do so. He submits that by the judgments rendered in the aforesaid two cases dated 18th November, 2003 and 28th February, 2007, it was observed that the petitioner will be entitled to get salary till the date she worked as a teacher in the school. The respondents, therefore, were directed to release the amount of salary if not already paid to the said petitioners' within a stipulated period.
(3.) THE petitioner thereafter has approached this Court in the present case for salary of the aforesaid period during which she has worked before her termination. According to the petitioner at para 19 of the counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents they have categorically state that her salary was stopped from June, 1994 till the date of her termination on coming to know that her appointment was irregular and not made by any competent authority. In the wake of such admission on the part of the respondents the petitioner's salary for the aforesaid period was directed not to be released.;