Writ Petition No. 5369 of 2024 · Bombay High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- Y G KHOBRAGADE, MANGESH S PATIL
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. In light of above, both the petitions are allowed. The impugned termination orders are quashed and set aside. (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.)(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)jhs/2/2
Judgment
925 WP NO. 5369 OF 2024 & Anr.IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADWRIT PETITION NO. 5369 OF 2024GITANJALI VITTHAL MAULEVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERSWITHWRIT PETITION NO. 5371 OF 2024KOMAL SOMNATH GARADVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA…•Mr. S. B. Solanke, Advocate h/f. Mr. S. S. Thombre, Advocatefor the petitioner in both writ petitions•Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in both writ petitions•Mr. A. R. Gaikwad, Advocate h/f. Mr. A.D. Aghav, Advocate forrespondent Nos. 3 and 4 in both writ petitions…CORAM: MANGESH S. PATIL & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.DATE: 25.04.2025PER COURT :.Heard both sides finally in both the matters, and wehave perused the papers.
Both the sides are ad idem that the issue involved in both these petitions stands squarely covered by the judgment of the division bench in the matter of Manoj Gopal Mahale Vs. the State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No. 568 of 2025), decided at the principal1/2 925 WP NO. 5369 OF 2024 & Anr.seat on 21.04.2025, except that the order of termination has not been effectuated in the present matter and the petitioners still continue tobe in the employment, unlike the petitioners in writ petition No. 568of 2025.
The impugned orders of termination of each of these petitioners has been passed on the premise that their names appeared in the list of candidates alleged to be involved in the scam that had happened during 2019 TET examination. However, even if their performance at the TET stands cancelled, as per the Right of Childrento Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (RTE Act), and the regulations governing it, qualification of CTET is also an eligibility criteria for appearing at the TAIT and the basic selection examinationis TAIT and not the TET.
If the petitioners even otherwise, independent of TET,were eligible to appear at TAIT on the basis of their CTETqualification, the sole ground assigned by respondent No.3 – the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar, for passing the order of termination would not be legally sustainable.
In light of above, both the petitions are allowed. The impugned termination orders are quashed and set aside. (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.)(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)jhs/2/2
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.