Pranita Thomas Kedari v. The State Of Maharashtra Throu. Its Principal Sec. School Education And Sports Dept And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 16826 OF 2025 Pranita Thomas Kedari ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

....Respondents Digitally signed by VINA ARVIND KHADPE Date:

2026.01.22 21:07:04 +0530 VINA ARVIND KHADPE ---- Mr. Ratan L. Adhe, Advocate for Petitioner.

Ms. P. N. Diwan, AGP for State.

---- CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATE : 14th JANUARY, 2026 P.C. :- 1.

The Respondent No. 5 - Institution to be of Christian religious in the light of the Certificate dated 21st July 2024 granted by the Competent Authority of the Minority Development Department, Government of Maharashtra.

2.

Petitioner is a teacher who has been selected and appointed on 01.07.2018, as an Assistant Teacher (Graduate Teacher). Approval is declined for the reasons that he does not have the TET qualification.

3.

We have considered the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide the Judgment dated 1st September, 2025

delivered in Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust v/s. State of Maharashtra and Others (Civil Appeal No. 1385 of 2025 and connected Appeals) and the view taken by this Court in Sagar Dattatray Chorghe and Others v/s. State of Maharashtra and others (Writ Petition No. 7943 of 2024 and Writ Petition No. 861 of 2025) decided on 11th September, 2025. The Petitioner is, therefore, protected until the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court with regard to the minority institutions.

4.

The learned Advocate for the Petitioner No. 3 submits that he would make his best endeavour to clear the State TET or Central TET, within 2 years from today.

5.

In view of the above, this Petition is partly allowed. The impugned order dated 10.12.2024, is quashed and set aside. The Petitioner teacher would endeavour to acquire the State TET or C-TET qualification within 2 years or as may be ordered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court with regard to the minority institutions, which issue has been referred to a larger bench. 6.

It goes without saying that if the Petitioner teacher is being protected, he be granted conditional approval and a

conditional entry in the Shalarth I/D, so as to enable him to draw salary. If it is an unaided institution, the employer would ensure that his salary will be paid.

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)