IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6528 OF 1999 Yusuf Raffiyuddin Mulani ..Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents. .... Mr. A.M. Joshi for the Petitioner. Mr. R.M. Patne, AGP for Respondents 1 to 3. ..... CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 21st April, 2008. P.C. : The Petitioner holds the B.A. and B. Ed. qualification and was appointed as an Assistant Teacher by the Sixth Respondent with effect from 11th June, 1991. The Petitioner has stated before the Court that since then he continues to be in the service of the Sixth Respondent. According to the Petitioner, from the date of his appointment he was placed in the trained graduate scale. By a circular dated 5th November, 1997 the State Government directed that all teachers who were untrained should be placed in the scale of Rs.975-1660 and the teachers should be required to acquire the stipulated qualification within the prescribed period. The Fifth Respondent who is the administrative officer of the Municipal School Board issued a direction on 20th February, 1998 to the Headmaster of the School directing that the Petitioner should be placed in the scale applicable to untrained primary school teachers viz. Rs.975-1660. With effect from 1st January, 1997 the scale of the Petitioner was reduced to that of an untrained teacher. The Petitioner has relied upon a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Tukaram Tryambak Chaudhari v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition 4623 of 1999 and connected matters). The Division Bench followed the earlier judgment in Kondiba S/o Dattatrao Mirashe v. State of Maharashtra1 in which it was clarified that out of every four sanctioned teachers, the first three teachers should possess the S.S.C. and D.Ed. qualifications while the Fourth teacher may be a graduate with B. Ed. / D.Ed.. Accordingly 25% of the posts of teachers for standards 5th to 7th were converted from S.S.C. plus D.Ed. to graduate plus B.Ed./ D.Ed. Having regard to the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench it is only appropriate and proper if a direction is issued to the Fourth Respondent the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, 1 2003(2) Mh.L.J. 432. Pune to ascertain whether the Petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of the 25% quota in the trained graduate scale having regard to the judgment of the Division Bench in Writ Petition 4632 of 1999 already noted above. This Petition is accordingly disposed of by directing the Fourth Respondent to carry out the aforesaid exercise after furnishing an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner within a period of three months from today. It is needless to add that should the Petitioner be entitled to the benefit of the trained graduate scale, necessary consequential directions shall be issued in that regard. In the circumstances of the case, the Petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. *****