The main legal point established in the judgment is the rejection of the claim for salary in the scale of pay or for regularization from the date of initial appointment and the direction for the highest authority in the Finance Department of the Govt. of Assam to take a decision on the applicability of the Assam Service Pension Rules, 1969 or the New Contributory Pension Scheme to the class of employees who were regularized subsequently.

1. Heard Mr. S Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 3658/2013 Mr. SS Dey, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 2369/2013 and WP(C) 2371/2013, Mr. SS Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP(C) No. 5073/2014 and WP(C) No.5076/2014, Mr. BD Konwar, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No.5559/2014 and WP(C) 3999/2014, Mr. DK Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 2937/2013, WP(C) No. 3799/2013, WP(C) No. 3807/2017, WP(C) No. 3811/2013, WP(C) No. 3895/2013, WP(C) No. 4029/2013 and WP(C) No.4820/2013. Also heard Mr. D Saikia, learned Senior Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing Counsel for the Finance Department and Mr. N. Sarma as well as Mr. S.P. Bhattacharjee, learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department.

2. The learned counsel for the writ petitioners in the other writ petition had adopted the arguments led by the aforementioned counsel and have not made any independent or distinct submission of their own.

3. The core facts leading to this batch of writ petitions can be culled out from the various writ petitions as well as the submissions of different learned counsel for either parties is that an advertisement dated 28.12.1996 was issued by the Director of Elementary Education Assam, inter alia, inviting applications for participating in a selection process in respect of 7500 posts of teachers spread over the entire State of Assam. Most of the present petitioners have participated in the said selection process and are stated to have been selected. Although neither side could provide a definite information, but what can be inferred is that perhaps some appointments were made pursuant to the said selection, although such appointments, if made, are not connected with the dispute raised in the present petitions. But, however, none of the present petitioners, who claim that they were also selected in the said selection process were so appointed.

4. A further factual aspect that is required to be taken note of is that the selection process for 7500 posts of teachers initiated by the advertisement dated 28.12.1996 was not brought to its complete logical end, except that some appointments may have been made. It is stated that the reason for not bringing the same to its logical end and not making the appointments is that at the relevant point of time there was a ban being imposed by the Government of Assam on appointment of teachers. Mr. D Saikia, learned Senior Additional Advocate General for the State respondents makes a statement that the ban on appointments was imposed, inasmuch as, the financial condition of the Government of Assam at that time was not good enough to support the appointments of all the 7500 posts that were advertised

5. Be that as it may, in the year 1998, the Government of Assam had undertaken to implement a Central Government Scheme which goes by the nomenclature of Operation Black Board (in short, OBB). Mr. D Saikia, learned Senior Additional Advocate General contends that the OBB Scheme of the Central Government was, in fact, a precursor to the present day legislation of Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act (in short RTE Act).In fact by the OBB scheme, it was the endeavour of the Central Government to provide education for all which in turn, necessitated the appointment/engagement of more number of teachers all over the country.

6. The OBB scheme, in general, provided that during the currency of the Ninth Plan the financial requirement for sustaining the OBB scheme appointed teachers would be sustained by the Central Government, but thereafter, it would be the responsibility of the respective State Governments to bear the financial burden for continuing with the OBB scheme appointed teachers.

7. In the aforesaid premises, the Government of Assam in the Education Department had acted upon the OBB scheme in two stages. In the first stage, by the communication dated 24.04.199