1 wp 793.06 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 793 OF 2006 Ramesh S/o Manikrao Tate, Age : 45 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Samrat Ashok Prathmik Shala, Sidharth Nagar, New Mondha, Parbhani, Dist. Parbhani. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Education Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya Mumbai - 32. 2. The Director of Education, Research and Training Institute, Pune - 30. 3. The Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Parbhani, Tq. & Dist. Parbhani. 4. Samrat Ashok Prathmik Shala, Sidharth Nagar, New Mondha, Parbhani, Dist. Parbhani. .. Respondents Shri U. P. Giri, Advocate for the Petitioner - absent. Shri P. P. More, Advocate for the Respondents/State. 2 wp 793.06 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 794 OF 2006 Sangram S/o Limbaji Rathod, Age : 27 Years, Occu. : Service as assistant teacher, R/o Pethchiwadi, Tahat Hadoli (J), Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Department of School Education , Mantralaya Mumbai. 2. The Director The Maharashtra State Council for Educational Research and Training, Pune. 3. The Director of Education Maharashtra State, Pune. 4. The Deputy Director of Education, Latur Region, Latur. 5. The Education Officer, (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Nanded. 6. The Secretary, Shivaji Mofat Education Society, Kandhar, Tq. Kandhar, Dist. Nanded. 3 wp 793.06 7. The Maharashtra State Examination Council, 17, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Marg, Pune, through its Commissioner. .. Respondents Shri S. R. Choukidar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri R. P. Phatake, A.G.P. for the Respondent/State. Shri V. S. Panpatte, Advocate for the Respondent No. 5. Shri S. S. Sawargaonkar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 6- absent. Shri A. R. Nikam, Advocate for the Respondent No. 7. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 807 OF 2006 Faimida Mohd Osman Shaikh, Age : 34 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Samrat Ashok Prathmik Shala, Sidharth Nagar, New Mondha, Parbhani, Dist. Parbhani. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Education Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya Mumbai - 32. 2. The Director of Education, Research and Training Institute, Pune - 30. 4 wp 793.06 3. The Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Parbhani, Tq. & Dist. Parbhani. 4. Samrat Ashok Prathmik Shala, Sidharth Nagar, New Mondha, Parbhani, Dist. Parbhani. .. Respondents Shri U. P. Giri, Advocate for the Petitioner - absent. Shri D. R. Kale, Advocate for the Respondents/State. Shri M. M. Patil (Beedkar), Advocate for the Respondent No. 4. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 813 OF 2006 Sunil S/o Kishanrao Jadhav, Age : 29 Years, Occu. : Service as assistant teacher, R/o Gondhani Tanda Primary School, Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Department of School Education , Mantralaya Mumbai. 2. The Director The Maharashtra State Council for Educational Research and Training, Pune. 5 wp 793.06 3. The Director of Education Maharashtra State, Pune. 4. The Deputy Director of Education, Latur Region, Latur. 5. The Education Officer, (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Nanded. 6. The Secretary, Shivaji Mofat Education Society, Kandhar, Tq. Kandhar, Dist. Nanded. 7. The Maharashtra State Examination Council, 17, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Marg, Pune, through its Commissioner. .. Respondents Shri S. R. Choukidar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri R. P. Phatake, A.G.P. for the Respondent/State. Shri V. S. Panpatte, Advocate for the Respondent No. 5. Shri S. S. Sawargaonkar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 6- absent. Shri A. R. Nikam, Advocate for the Respondent No. 7. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE & S. S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 18TH MARCH, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : . The learned advocate for the petitioner is not present in 6 wp 793.06 Writ Petition No. 793/2006 and W. P. No. 807/2006. We have noted that he has been absent on many occasions. Therefore, we have appointed Mr. Choukidar, the learned advocate appearing in other connected matters as amicus-curiae in these petitions. 02. All these petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by common judgment and order. The petitioners in these petitions are aggrieved by an order dated 31st December, 2005 passed by the Deputy Director, Maharashtra State Educational Research and Training Council, Pune. By this order the admissions of the petitioners to the postal D. Ed. course have been cancelled. There is no dispute that all the petitioners had successfully cleared the postal D. Ed. course much before the impugned order was passed. 03. In a batch of writ petitions decided by the Division Bench (Coram : B. R. Gavai & R. M. Borde, JJ.) on 07th December, 2010, a similar question had arisen. The same order dated 31st December, 2005 was challenged in those petitions bearing Writ Petition No. 610/2006 and other connected matters. The Division Bench, after considering in detail the submissions of the petitioners as well as the learned A. G. P., has held that the order 7 wp 793.06 dated 31st December, 2005 could not have been passed in the manner as it was. The Division Bench has further clarified that it was not concerned whether the appointments of the petitioners were either as untrained or trained teachers and that it had only concerned itself with the cancellation of the admissions which were granted to the petitioners in those writ petitions. In our opinion, since the facts in the present cases are identical to the facts in Writ Petition No. 610/2006 and other connected writ petitions, these petitions can be disposed of in the light of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 07th December, 2010. 04. Accordingly, the order dated 31st December, 2005 is quashed and set aside. Thus, the admissions of the petitioners which were cancelled by the impugned order will be restored. The writ petitions are allowed. The rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs. [S. S. SHINDE, J.] [SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J.] bsb/March 11