Sonwane Sandeep Laxman And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

2024:BHC-AUG:20365-DB 1 wp 911.24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 911 OF 2024 Sonwane Sandeep Laxman and others .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri S. R. Sapkal, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri S. P. Joshi, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1 and 2. Shri S. R. Dheple, Advocate h/f Shri P. R. Nangare, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.

CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 03 SEPTEMBER 2024.

FINAL ORDER :

.

The learned advocate for the petitioners tenders across the bar affidavit in support of the petition. The petitioners are teachers appointed by a minority institution, are aggrieved by the impugned communication dated 28 December 2023 whereby, the respondent No. 3/Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad has refused to include their names in Shalarth Pranali on the ground that proposals were not supported by the documents showing that all were TET qualified as per the Government Resolution dated 06.03.2013 and the subsequent corrigenda.

2.

Admittedly, there is approval granted to the petitioners' appointments which is annexed with the affidavit in reply filed

2 wp 911.24 today.

3.

The issue regarding mandatory nature of TET qualification pursuant to the decision of the coordinate division bench is subjudice before the Supreme Court in the SLP (Civil) No. 8300 of 2021 and the Supreme Court has granted status quo. 4.

In the light of such supervening events, this Court has been consistently directing the Education Officer/Deputy Director of Education to pass appropriate orders for including the names of the individuals in the Shalarth Pranali since it is merely a matter of disbursement of salary, however, ensuring that they undertake to abide by ultimate decision of the Supreme Court. 5.

There being no other reason resorted to in the impugned communication for refusing to consider the request, the petition is allowed partly. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The respondent/Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad shall reconsider the proposals and pass appropriate order for including petitioners' names in the Shalarth Pranali as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of four

(04) weeks from today. However, this shall be subject to petitioners filing an undertaking on affidavit duly sworn before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court and tendering its copies before the Education Officer (Primary).

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ] bsb/Sept. 24