JUDGMENT Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. This representative action has been instituted on behalf of 23 number of L.P. School teachers who belong to the Bhuban Nagar Primary Teacher Gathering Centre, Fakiragram Circle in the district of Kokrajhar. 2. The facts as may be necessary to unravel the controversy, may be stated as follows. A bill for payment of salary for the month of July, 2000, amounting to Rs.1,55,345.00 was prepared by the Block Elementary Education Officer for the 23 petitioners. The said bill was passed by the Treasury Officer and Treasury Token No. 177 was issued against the said bill to one Habibur Rahman, the Centre Secretary who was authorised to receive payment of the bill. According to the petitioners, the authorised person went to the Bank to receive payment on 5.8.2000, when he was told that the bill was not received by the Bank from the Treasury. Enquiries in the office of the Treasury Officer were made and thereafter, a First Information Report was lodged by the Treasury Officer with the police station at Kokrajhar. In the meantime, it appears that the bill in question was paid to an unauthorised person by the Bank. In the F.I.R. filed, it has been mentioned that the said payment was made on 7.8.2000 and in the bill against which such payment was made, the name of the authorised person to receive payment was erased and substituted and further that in place of Token No. 177 issued against the bill, Token No. 129 was inserted. The FIR filed by the Treasury Officer had resulted in institution of a criminal case, the present position of which is, however, not known to the learned counsel for the parties. However, the salary for the month of July, 2000 continues to remain unpaid and such nonpayment of the salary for the month of July, 2000 has also resulted in non-finalisation of the pension of some of the petitioners, who have retired in the meantime. 3. The respondent Nos. 7 and 8 have filed their respective affidavits and Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners has taken elaborate pains to persuade the Court to hold that the stand taken by the said respondents in the affidavits filed is not justified. An attempt has been made by Mr. 3. The respondent Nos. 7 and 8 have filed their respective affidavits and Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners has taken elaborate pains to persuade the Court to hold that the stand taken by the said respondents in the affidavits filed is not justified. An attempt has been made by Mr. Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bank to satisfy the Court that no liability can be fast ended on the Bank for the payment made. 4. A Criminal Proceeding, i.e., Kokrajhar P.S. Case No. 131/2000 under Section 468/420 of the Indian Penal Code has been registered on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged by the Treasury Officer on 14.8.2000. As there is no material to indicate as to whether the said case has been finalised, it will be wholly inappropriate for this Court to go into the contentions raised by the learned counsels and to record any finding thereon, as the same may prejudicially affect the police investigation in the matter or trial of the case, if such investigation has ended in a charge sheet. This Court, therefore, declines to go into the said question and hereby orders that the aforesaid police case, i.e., Kokrajhar P.S. Case No. 131/ 2000 under Section 468/420 of the Indian Penal Code be brought to its logical end by all concerned authorities as expeditiously as possible. 5. Coming to the grievances raised by the petitioners with regard to non-payment of salary, what must be noticed is that regardless of the fact that as to who is liable for the payment made against the salary bill of the petitioners in the circumstances stated above, the petitioners continue to remain unpaid for the month of July, 2000. The legal entitlement of the petitioners to receive salary for the month of July, 2000 has not been questioned in the present proceeding. The materials on record do not indicate any role of any of the petitioners in the events that have occurred. The further statement made by the petitioners that non-payment of salary for the month in question has resulted in keeping the entitlement for payment of pension of such of the petitioners who have retired, pending, has not been controverted. Non-payment of the amount has, therefore, other adverse consequences on the petitioners. The further statement made by the petitioners that non-payment of salary for the month in question has resulted in keeping the entitlement for payment of pension of such of the petitioners who have retired, pending, has not been controverted. Non-payment of the amount has, therefore, other adverse consequences on the petitioners. Considering the totality of the facts, I am of the view that this writ petition should be disposed by directing the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam in the Education Department as well in the Finance Department to take all the necessary steps and to pass all consequential orders for payment of salary to the petitioners for the month of July, 2000 as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6. The writ petition stands closed in terms of the above directions.