1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1649 OF 2010. Kartick Birendranath Mondal -: VERSUS :- Maharogi Sewa Samiti, Anandwan Warora and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : JULY 16, 2010. Heard Shri G.N. Khanzode, learned counsel for petitioner, Shri S.A. Pathak, learned Counsel for respondent no.1, Mrs. Wasnik, learned A.G.P. for respondent no.2 and Shri P.N. Shende, learned counsel for respondent no.3. The promotion of petitioner as Vice-Principal has been set aside by the School Tribunal in Appeal filed by the present respondent no.3. Shri Khanzode, learned counsel for petitioner contends that respondent no.3 possess DHE qualification which is not equivalent to 2 B.Ed. He relies upon the entries in Schedule-F of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 to urge that the said qualification no where expressly finds mention in it. He also invites attention to the resolution dated 26.10.2004 by which, according to him the government has clarified that this qualification is not equivalent to B.Ed. and holders thereof are therefore not eligible for promotion to the post of Vice Principal or Assistant Headmaster. He states that this position is not considered appropriately in the light of the provisions of Schedule-F by the School Tribunal or by the earlier judgment of this Court. Shri Shende, learned counsel for respondent no.3, learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 2 and 4 and Shri Pathak, learned counsel for respondent no.1 Management are supporting the orders of the School Tribunal. Shri Shende, learned counsel states that Schedule-F in its Category “C” expressly uses the word “or its equivalent”, and because of that the State Government has powers to recognize the qualification as 3 equivalent to training qualification of B.Ed., and in exercise of that powers the recognition is already granted and the School Tribunal has accordingly considered it. Attention is invited to the judgment dated 18.12.1992 in Writ Petition No. 2752/1992 to state that there also the recognition to equivalence granted since 18.08.1975 has been relied upon. The recent judgment in Writ Petition No.3204/1991 with connected matters (at Bombay) decided on 05.04.2007 is also pressed into service for same purpose. It is pointed out to this Court that the communication dated 26.10.2004 is in fact a letter issued by the Desk Officer to Director of Education and it is not an authentic circular or a policy decision. With the assistance of learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have perused the relevant papers. The judgment of Hon'ble Division Bench and the judgment of Learned Single Judge of this Court dated 05.04.2007 notes the equivalence granted. The Hon'ble Division Bench has relied upon the government resolution dated 18.08.1975 and has found that the said 4 qualification of D.H.E. Is equivalent to B.Ed. degree. The School Tribunal has therefore rightly appreciated the position. The decision of the Deputy Director of Education dated 11.04.2007 relied upon by Shri Khanzode, learned counsel does not consider this situation, and in any case is not binding on the School Tribunal. With the result, no case is made out warranting interference in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is thus dismissed, with no order as to costs. JUDGE Rgd.