Rekha Hanumant Khose v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary, Dept. Of School Edu. And Sports And ORS

JPP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8247 OF 2023 Rekha Hanumant Khose ... Petitioner V/s.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

... Respondents Mr. Saurabh Pakale with Mr. Nilesh Desai i/b. Ms. Padmaja U. Malgaonkar for the Petitioner Mr. B.V. Samant, Addl. G.P. with Ms. Pooja Joshi Deshpande, AGP for the Respondents 1,4 & 5 Mr. Ashutosh Misra for Respondent - UOI CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.

DATE : 03 APRIL 2024 P.C. :- This Petition is filed challenging the impugned order refusing to enter the name of the Petitioner in the Shalarth ID Portal on the ground that the Petitioner has not passed the Teachers Eligible Test (TET) within the stipulated period. 2.

The learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that the approval to the Petitioner's appointment was granted on 11 October 2018. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has relied on the

decision/order of the Aurangabad Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 11121 of 2023 (Dattatray Devidas Sonwale and Anr. vs. The State of Maharashtra through its Principal Secretary and Ors.) decided on 7 September 2023, which is followed by this Court in another batch of Writ Petitions with lead Writ Petition No. 12628 of 2023 vide order dated 11 December 2023. Therefore, direction is sought as per the aforesaid decision.

3.

Having perused the impugned order and the order passed in Writ Petition No. 11121 of 2022, we find the factual position is identical and therefore, this Petition also needs to be disposed of in same terms as per order dated 8 February 2024 passed in Writ Petition No. 12215 of 2023 (Ranjana Sudam Chimate vs. The State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Department of School Education and Sports & Ors.).

4.

In light thereof, we dispose of the above Petition by passing the following directions :

(a) The Petitioner would tender an undertaking that, she would abide by the conclusions that would be drawn by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and if the verdict is adverse to those teachers who do not have the TET qualification or have cleared the TET after 31/03/2019, or as the case may be, she would abide by the same without raising any cause of action.

(b) Let such affidavit undertaking be filed in this Court within 15 days from today and a copy be tendered to the concerned Education Officer within the same timeline.

(c) Considering the above, the proposal of the Petitioner would be considered for entering her name in the 'Shalarth-ID' on its own merits, save and except, the reason that she is not TET qualified. Needless to state, the proposal would be decided within 30 days after the submission of the undertaking.

(d) If an adverse order is passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by which the teachers are covered by clause (a), the State Government would not recover the salaries already paid to them, since they have worked for those tenures and they have earned their salaries for performing their duties.

(e) In the event, the candidates like the Petitioner are protected by the Hon'ble Supreme Court's conclusions and they are held to be qualified to continue in employment, they would be entitled for all service benefits like promotions, increments, etc. M.M. SATHAYE, J.

NITIN JAMDAR, J.

by JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR Date: 2024.04.06 17:16:10 +0530 JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR