(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4284 OF 2011 Uddhav Laxman Vaidya PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. Vijay A. Dhakne, advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. V.H. Dighe, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. G.R. Syed, advocate for Respondent No. 4. Mr. M.C. Syed, advocate for Respondent No. 5. ..... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 27th SEPTEMBER, 2011 ORAL ORDER: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally, by consent. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioner seeks directions to Respondent No. 2 to grant permanent approval to his appointment as Trained Graduate Primary Teacher with backwages. It is the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner, who possesses the B.A., B.P.Ed. qualification, was initially appointed as Trained Graduate Teacher. However, inaction on the part of the Respondent Nos. (2) 2 and 3 in not granting approval to his such appointment is not sustainable in law. 3. In the reply filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, it is stated that since the initial appointment of the petitioner itself was not permissible in law, the approval to his appointment cannot be granted. 4. Though, no doubt that the Full Bench of this Court in the case of "Smt. Jayashree Sunil Chavan v. the State of Maharashtra and others" 2000 (3) ALL MR 465, had taken a view that for being appointed as a Primary Teacher, the qualification of D.Ed. was necessary, the Apex Court in the case of "State of Maharashtra v. Tukaram Trimbak Chaudhari and others" 2007 AIR SCW 1321, has held that such of the primary schools to which classes of 5th to 7th are attached, the teachers possessing B.Ed. qualification would also qualify. In that view of the matter, refusal to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner on the ground that he does not possess D.Ed. qualification is not sustainable. (3) 5. Mr. Syed, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 4 makes a categorical statement that the Management has not drawn salary of any person against the post on which the petitioner was appointed. The said statement of the learned counsel made on behalf of Respondent No. 4 is taken on record. In that view of the matter, we allow the Writ Petition by directing the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to grant approval to the petitioner's appointment as a Trained Primary Teacher from the date of his initial appointment and pay him the arrears of his salary within a period of three months from today. 6. Insofar as the claim of the petitioner for being appointed as Trained Graduate Teacher, we are not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioner in that behalf and the claim insofar as approval in the pay scale of Trained Graduate Teacher, the same shall stand rejected. 7. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] npj/wp4284-11 (4)