1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.739 OF 2009. Dinkar S/o Kerba Sanap and another ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents. ... WITH WRIT PETITION NO.5918 OF 2008 Tukaram S/o Dhondiba Gaikwad and others ... Petitioners. Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents. ... WITH WRIT PETITION NO.5836 OF 2008 Arun S/o Balu Jadhav and others ... Petitioners. Versus 2 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents. ... Mr.S.R.Barlinge, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.K.J.Ghute Patil, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the State. ... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 27.04.2010. PER COURT 1. In all these three Petitions, Rule came to be issued by this Court and these three petitions were tagged along with other companion petitions and were accordingly listed before us. The companion petitions to which these three petitions have been tagged came to be adjourned at the request of the learned Asstt.Govt. Pleader for filing affidavit-in-reply. The learned counsel for the parties i.e. the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 agree that these petitions may be heard today finally though they are not listed as such before us in the final hearing category matters. Learned counsels 3 for the parties agree that the order which was passed by the other Division Benches in similar matters i.e. of remitting the matter back to the Respondents for deciding the question of grant of approval to the petitioners as trained teachers pursuant to the judgment of the Supreme Court, in "State of Maharashtra and others Vs. Tukaram Tryambak Chaudhari and others" 2007 AIR SCW 1321, we also pass in these three petitions. 2. In the light of the submissions advanced before us by the learned counsels for the parties, therefore, we allow these petitions and quash and set aside the orders passed by the Respondents granting approval to the appointment of the petitioners as untrained teachers and remitting matters back to the Respondents for a decision afresh in accordance with law as to the question whether the petitioners are entitled to have their services approved as trained teachers, in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in "State of Maharashtra and others Vs. Tukaram Tryambak Chaudhari and others" (supra). According to us, it would be appropriate if the 4 Respondents decide the aforesaid question and pass orders in accordance with law within two (2) months from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioners. 3. The Writ Petitions are accordingly allowed. Rule is made absolute on the terms indicated above with no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (P.V.HARDAS,J.) asp/office/wp73909