Khushi Darshan Nijai And ORS v. Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 16453 OF 2023 Khushi Darshan Nijai and Ors.

... Petitioners V/s.

The Union of India and Ors.

... Respondents Mr. Sanjeev B. Deore for the Petitioners Mr. S.B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent - State CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.

DATE : 01 MARCH 2024 P.C. :- Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

The facts pleaded in this Petition are only reflected in paragraph 14 of the Petition which are as follows :- "14. Petitioners submits that Petitioner No.1 was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Respondent No.7 school on 17.06.2013 and was granted approval on Non grant scale vide Respondent No.6 order dated 27.08.2013, Petitioner No.2 is appointed as assistant teacher in Respondent No.7 school on 17.06.2013, and was granted approval as assistant teacher by Respondent No.5 vide letter dated 27.08.2013 on Non grant scale Petitioner No.3 is appointed as Assistant in Respondent No.8 school on 19.06.2014 and was granted approval by

Respondent No.6 vide letter dated 07.03.2015. Further the Petitioner No.3 was transferred on granted post and her approval was granted by Respondent No.6 vide order dated 19.09.2019."

3.

The learned Counsel for the parties have placed before us the order passed by the Division Bench (Aurangabad Bench) in Writ Petition No. 11121 of 2023 dated 7 September 2023 wherein the Division Bench has considered identical situation as to whether the Petitioner should be paid salary or not and has passed certain directions. The learned Counsel are ad idem that this direction would apply to the case of the Petitioners as well. 4.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of on same terms as Writ Petition No. 11121 of 2023.

5.

Hence, the following order :- (a) The impugned orders are quashed and set aside. (b) The Petitioners would tender an undertaking that, they 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, they would abide by the same without raising any cause of action.

(c) 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.

(d) Considering the above, the proposal of the Petitioners would be considered for entering their names in the 'Shalarth-ID' on their own merits, save and except, the reason that they are not TET qualified. Needless to state, the proposals would be decided within 30 days after the submissions of the undertakings. (e) 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.

(f) In the event, the candidates like the Petitioners 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: 2024.03.04 11:44:52 +0530 JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR