Order By Court-Heard 2. From the pleadings of the parties, it appears that it is not disputed that the petitioner was working as an Assistant Teacher in Bangla Kanya Madhya Vidyalaya, Pakur and his salary for the period from January 1999 was not paid till he worked in the said school. 3. According to the respondents, the initial appointment of the petitioner was itself illegal because at the time he was appointed he was not having valid teacher's training certificate. 4. The counsel for the petitioner states that his appointment was duly approved by the competent authority and in reply to that, the State-counsel placed reliance on the rules and guidelines issued by the State Government as contained in Annexure-B/1, wherein it has been stated that unless a teacher is having a Training Certificate, his appointment may not be approved and therefore, even if his appointment was approved the same was in violation of the said rules of the State Government. 5. Be that as it may; the fact Respondent-mains that there is no dispute that rightly or wrongly the petitioner worked in the said School and his salary from January 1999 has not paid to him for one or the other reason and therefore, in my view, since the work was taken from the petitioner for a certain period and as such, he is he: . '\0 be entitled to get the salary for the period he worked in Bangla Kanya Madhya Vidyalaya. pakur. 6. Accordingly this Writ petition is being disposed or-by directing the respondent no. 4, District Superintendent of Education, Pakur to take appropriate action in the matter for payment of the due salary to the petitioner if he has actually worked for the said period. He may write to the Director, Primary Education, Ranchi to release the necessary fund for payment of the due salary to the petitioner. 7. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.