1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD . WRIT PETITION NO. 1550 OF 1997 Mangala D/o Bhimashankar Gulve Age : 40 Yrs., Occ. Assistat Teacher, Sir Syed Marathi Primary School Indira Nagar, New Baijipura, Aurangabad. .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The Education Officer (Primary) Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad. 2. Sir Syed Education Society Aurangabad, Through its Secretary. 3. The Head Mistress Sir Syed Marathi Primary School Indira Nagar, New Baijipura, Aurangabad. 4. The State of Maharashtra Through Govt. Pleader High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. 5. Smt. Shirin Bano Age : 40 Yrs., Occ. Service, Assistant Teacher Sir Syed Marathi Primary School Indira Nagar, New Baijipura, 2 Aurangabad. (Respondent no. 5 is added as per leave granted by the Court vide Order dated 16/3/2006. .... RESPONDENTS Mr. S.R. Barlinge, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N.B.Patil, Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. Mrs. A.N.Ansari, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 & 3. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 21/6/2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : [ PER - B.R. GAVAI, J. ] 1. By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 1/1/1997 passed by the respondent no. 1 thereby refusing to grant approval to the petitioner as a trained graduate teacher. 2. The petitioner came to be appointed vide Order dated 13/8/1991 in the pay scale of Rs. 1400 – 2600/-. At the time of her appointment, she was possessing qualification as M.A. B.Ed. Vide staffing pattern, on 16/12/1993, one post was available in the cadre of primary graduate trained teacher. Since the petitioner had undertaken not to claim the salary in the scale of trained graduate teacher prior to the date on which the said post was sanctioned, the respondent management passed a resolution dated 21/12/1996, thereby recommending grant of trained graduate teacher’s scale to the petitioner from the academic 3 session 1993-94. However, vide the order dated 1/1/1997, the approval to the appointment of the petitioner came to be rejected on the ground that the petitioner is not possessing D.Ed. qualification. 3. The Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra and others V/s Tukaram Tryambak Choudhari and others reported in 2007 AIR SCW – 1321 has held that in so far as the primary schools to which standards 5th to 7th are attached, B.Ed. qualification is permissible qualification for trained teacher and it is not necessary that he should also possess D.Ed. Qualification. In any case, from the staffing pattern which was sanctioned on 16/12/1993, it is clear that in the academic year of 1993-94, the post of trained graduate teacher is available. It is not in dispute that the requisite qualification is graduation along with B.Ed degree. The petitioner possess the same. We, therefore, find that the respondent no. 1 erred in rejecting grant of approval to the petitioner as trained graduate teacher only because the petitioner did not possess D.Ed. qualification. We are informed that the petitioner has resigned from 2003. The only question, therefore, that would arise is regarding payment of arrears to the petitioner on account of the payment she was entitled as a graduate trained teacher. 4. We, therefore, allow the petition by directing respondent no. 1 to treat the petitioner as a trained graduate teacher from the academic session 1993-94 and pay her the arrears payable on account of salary admissible to the trained graduate teacher from the academic session 1993-94 till the date on which the petitioner has resigned. The bills for the said arrears will be submitted 4 by the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to respondent no. 1 within the period of two months from today and on receipt of the bills, respondent no. 1 shall pay the same to the petitioner within the period of four months there from. 5. In that view of the matter, Rule is made absolute on above terms with no order as to costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA ] [ B.R. GAVAI ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 1550.97