SHIVSHANKAR GURULING GADHAVE AND ORS v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND ORS

25 WP 4515 OF 2026IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD25 WRIT PETITION NO. 4515 OF 2026SHIVSHANKAR GURULING GADHAVE AND ORSVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND ORS...Mr. E. S. Murge, Advocate for the PetitionersMs. Neha Kamble, AGP for Respondent/s – State WITHCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4865 OF 2026 IN WP/4515/2026EKNATH SITARAM MOTE AND ORSVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND ORS…Mr. G. K. Kshirsagar, Advocate for ApplicantsMs. Neha Kamble, AGP for Respondent/s – State Mr. E. S. Murge, Advocate for Petitioner in W.P.…CORAM:SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.DATE:04.05.2026PER COURT :-.Civil Application No.4865 of 2026 has been filed for interventionin Writ Petition No.4515 of 2026, which would be decided along with WritPetition itself. ( 2 ) 25 WP 4515 OF 20262. Heard learned Advocate Mr. E. S. Murge for the petitioners, learned Advocate Mr.

G. K. Kshirsagar for applicants in Civil ApplicationNo.4865 of 2026 and for petitioners in Writ Petition No.4515 of 2026, learnedAGP Ms. Neha Kamble, for respondents/State.3. In this petition, what has been challenged is the letter dated03.04.2026 issued by Education Officer, thereby finalizing and publishing theimpugned seniority list of Extension Officer (Education), centre Head, principal and graduate primary teachers. It was on the basis of the data thatwas collected and the eligibility criteria is that those persons, who had clearedTET or CTET, should be given the said promotion of Extension Officer(Education), centre Head, principal and graduate primary teachers. Thepetitioners submitted that they have fulfill all eligibility criteria for promotionexcept the formal submission of the TET certificate. Therefore, they have givenwritten objection to Chief Executive Officer Zilla Parishad, Dharashivrequesting the inclusion of their names in the seniority list and same beconsidered for the purpose of promotion as the Apex Court has granted twoyears of time to submit the TET certificate and petitioners are ready to giveundertaking/affidavit in that respect.

The petitioners have put in the service oflong tenure and in such circumstance, if they are deprived of the promotionon the ground that as on the date of list they have not passed TET or CTET, ( 3 ) 25 WP 4515 OF 2026then it would be unjust for them. According to the petitioners/applicants, theaction of the Zilla Parishad is ex facie illegal and arbitrary.4. Learned AGP for the respondent/s - State vehemently submitsthat in view of Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust vs. State of Maharashtra andothers, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1912, Hon’ble Supreme Court has made it veryclear that the teachers who are teaching in the primary schools after cominginto force of the RTE Act should possess the qualification of TET and forpromotion it is specifically stated that those who have cleared TET or CTETthey should only be considered. As on today, the petitioners have not qualified. After they acquire that qualification their names would be considered.5.

Here, it is to be noted that various petitions have been filed by theteachers contending that they have appeared for TET or CTET exams and theirresults are awaited, still the Zilla Parishad authorities are proceeding with theprocess of promotion and, therefore, their seniority would be then get affectedand also the promotion chance. As per Anjuman Ishaat-E- Taleem Trust(Supra), the period of two years has been granted to the teachers, who hadentered the service prior to coming into force of the RTE Act, to clear the TETor CTET. We have taken note of the fact that though the process in some of the Zilla Parishads has started, the promotion list has not been finalized and, ( 4 ) 25 WP 4515 OF 2026therefore, in some matters we had given directions to the Zilla Parishadauthorities not to finalize the list in view of the fact that the result of theexamination of the petitioners i.e. CTET is not declared.

The facts in thematter are slightly different from other cases, yet broadly we can say that theeffect of making TET compulsory as held in Anjuman Ishaat- E-Taleem Trust(Supra) for promotion will have to be then interpreted taking intoconsideration the facts of each matter. It is necessary to consider, in eachmatter, whether, as on the date of the pronouncement of the judgment, onlythose candidates who had cleared TET or CTET were entitled to promotion, and in what manner the respondents are required to give effect to the saidjudgment. But taking into consideration the fact that the result is awaited, wethought it fit that the respondent/authorities should go ahead with the entireprocess, but they should not take the decision of finalizing the list ofpromotion till the next date. That means, till the affidavits-in-reply are filedand we hear the parties on that point, we had made said arrangement in thosematters.

6. Here, we are basically required to consider the ratio laid down in Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust (Supra) and whether the petitioners can besaid to be entitled to be considered for the promotion. Even in the interimorder, on which now the learned Advocate for the petitioners is relying, we ( 5 ) 25 WP 4515 OF 2026had observed that those teachers who had cleared the TET would beconsidered for promotion. So as of right the petitioners’ cannot seek anyinterim protection. We would consider the point ‘ J ’ of the decision in Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust (Supra) i.e. applicability of the TET to in-service teachers appointed prior to 2009 and requirement of the TETqualification for promotion of teachers. Paragraph Nos.164 to 170 of theaforesaid judgment discuss the aspect and especially in paragraph No.170, ithas been observed thus :-

170. As a logical corollary to the above, it is axiomaticthat those in-service teachers who aspire for promotion, irrespective of the length of their service, have to qualifythe TET in order to be eligible to have their candidatureconsidered for promotion.

7.

We are also taking note of paragraph Nos.216 to 218 ofthe aforesaid judgment, which read thus :-“216. Bearing in mind their predicament, we invoke ourpowers Under Article 142 of the Constitution of Indiaand direct that those teachers who have less than fiveyears' service left, as on date, may continue in service tillthey attain the age of superannuation without qualifyingthe TET. However, we make it clear that if any suchteacher (having less than five years' service left) aspiresfor promotion, he will not be considered eligible withouthe/she having qualified the TET.217. Insofar as in-service teachers recruited prior toenactment of the RTE Act and having more than 5 yearsto retire on superannuation are concerned, they shall be ( 6 ) 25 WP 4515 OF 2026under an obligation to qualify the TET within 2 yearsfrom date in order to continue in service. If any of suchteachers fail to qualify the TET within the time that wehave allowed, they shall have to quit service.

They maybe compulsorily retired; and paid whatever terminalbenefits they are entitled to. We add a rider that toqualify for the terminal benefits, such teachers must haveput in the qualifying period of service, in accordancewith the rules. If any teacher has not put in thequalifying service and there is some deficiency, his/hercase may be considered by the appropriate departmentin the Government upon a representation being made byhim/her.218. Subject to what we have said above, it is reiteratedthat those aspiring for appointment and those in-serviceteachers aspiring for appointment by promotion must, however, qualify the TET; or else, they would have noright of consideration of their candidature.8. Paragraph No.170 of the decision in Anjuman Ishaat-E-TaleemTrust (Supra) is crystallizing the right, yet if we read paragraph Nos.216 and218 conjointly, then it can be seen that it has been laid down that thoseteachers, who have less than five years left as on date (that means on01.09.2025 when the decision came) may continue in service, till they attainthe age of superannuation without qualifying the TET, however, those teachershaving left less than five years, if aspire promotion, then without qualifyingTET, he or she will not be considered and then paragraph No.218 reiteratesthat those in service teachers aspiring for appointment by promotion shouldqualify TET and this date will have to be taken as 01.09.2025, when Hon’ble ( 7 ) 25 WP 4515 OF 2026 Supreme Court pronounced the judgment.9.

Admittedly, the petitioners were not qualified TET or CTET on01.09.2025. Certainly, at least for this year, they will not be considered forpromotion taking into consideration these facts.10. Learned Advocate for the petitioners has tried to submit thatrespondent/authorities have hurriedly proceeded to prepare seniority list andalso published a temporary list of promotion with the condition that the saidpromotion, that is granted, is temporary and if any problem as regardsseniority or Court matter arises, then the promoted candidates can bereverted. Here, we do not want to go into the said list for the simple reasonthat as aforesaid in view of Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust (Supra) and thefact that the petitioners had not cleared TET or CTET on 01.09.2025, they arenot entitled to be promoted this year. In view of the same, the Writ Petitionstand dismissed. 11. Pending Civil Applications also stand disposed of. ( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. )

( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )PRW