Archana Ramkisan Ikkar vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 9606 Bom

                                  1                                ra 47.21

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                  REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 47 OF 2021
                                 IN
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 5705 OF 2020

 Sheshrao Janardhan Chaudhari
 and others                              ..   Applicants
            Versus
 The State of Maharashtra and others     ..   Non Applicants

                                AND
                  REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 48 OF 2021
                                 IN
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 1231 OF 2020

 Archana Ramkisan Ikkar                  ..   Applicant
            Versus
 The State of Maharashtra and others     ..   Non Applicants

                                WITH
                  REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 49 OF 2021
                                 IN
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 1231 OF 2020

 Vinodkumar Gunaji Wavhal                ..   Applicant
            Versus
 The State of Maharashtra and others     ..   Non Applicants

                                AND
                  REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 50 OF 2021
                                 IN
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 2340 OF 2020

 Seema Bajirao Mate                      ..   Applicant
            Versus
 The State of Maharashtra and others     ..   Non Applicants




::: Uploaded on - 22/07/2021            ::: Downloaded on - 23/07/2021 06:02:54 :::
                                         2                                ra 47.21

 Shri Tukaram M. Venjane, Advocate for the Applicants in all
 matters.
 Shri S. G. Karlekar, A.G.P. for Non Applicant Nos. 1 to 4 in all
 matters.
 Shri A. R. Nikam, Advocate for the Non Applicant No. 6 in all
 matters.
 Shri N. S. Tekale, Advocate for the Non Applicant No. 7 in all
 matters.


                           CORAM :    S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND
                                      SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE : 22ND JULY, 2021.

FINAL ORDER :

. Mr. Venjane, the learned advocate for review applicants submits that, the review applicants in all these matters had passed the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) examination in December 2019, August 2020 and February 2021 respectively. Their services need to be protected. The learned counsel refers to the judgment dated 28.01.2020 of the Division Bench of this Court at Principal Seat at Bombay in Writ Petition No. 747 of 2020 with other connected writ petitions. The learned counsel submits that, in the said cases, the Division Bench had granted protection to the services of the petitioners who had appeared for the examination in January 2020.

2. Mr. Karlekar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for non applicants/State and Mr. Nikam, the learned counsel for non applicant No. 6 submit that, the cut off date to clear the TET examination was 31st March 2019.

3 ra 47.21

3. The applicants are seeking review of the judgment and order of this Court dated 11.06.2021 passed in bunch of writ petitions bearing Writ Petition No. 4904 of 2020 with other connected writ petitions.

4. In the said judgment, we had held that the cut off date to clear the TET examination was 31 st Mach, 2019. The Central Government has also rejected the request of the State Government to extend the cut off date. We had relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in a case of State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Anand Kumar Yadav reported in (2018) 13 SCC 560.

5. The Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 747 of 2020 under judgment and order dated 28.01.2020 has also observed that, the petitioners must realize that they had no right to continue, if they fail to clear the test and they cannot dictate to the Government or to the Court that no such tests should be held or even after the cut off date their job should be protected if they do not attain this qualification. The cut off date to obtain qualification of TET as observed was 31st March, 2019.

6. In the light of that, no case for review is made out. The review applications as such are rejected. No costs.

[SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] bsb/July 21