[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Gitanjali Sudhakar Deshmukh vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 29 December, 2025
{1}
6 sr.no. WP 15700.25.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 15700 OF 2025
Gitanjali Sudhakar Deshmukh
....Petitioner
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary And Another
.....Respondent
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Prafulsingh H. Patil h,f. Mr. Patil
Prakashsing B.
AGP for Respondents: Ms. N.B. Kamble.
CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.
DATE : 29th DECEMBER, 2025. (Vacation Bench)
P.C. :-
1. Notice returnable on 12th January, 2026.
2. Learned AGP waives notice for respondent No.1.
3. Mr. Patil, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the applicant was denied permission for the registration of self-
certification/assessment through Pavitra Portal for the TAIT-2025
examination only on the ground that his name was found in the TET
Scam which had taken place in the year 2019 at the time of MAHATET
examinations, 2019. He further submits that the issue pertaining to the
eligibility of self-registration was considered by this Court in W.P. No.
8534 of 2023 with other connected writ petitions on 14.09.2023,
wherein, this Court has held that there are three modes of eligibility to
appear for the TAIT examination. The first mode is, D.Ed. Qualification
and TET passed; second mode is D.Ed. Qualification and Central TET
(CTET) and the third mode that the candidate must be a Graduate and
B.Ed. Qualification. The Division Bench has allowed the said writ
petition only to the extent that the candidates like that of the petitioners
were allowed to participate in the registration process of self-
{2}
6 sr.no. WP 15700.25.odt
certification/assessment through Pavitra Portal as they have cleared
Graduate examination and acquired D.Ed. Qualification even though
their names were involved in TET Scam.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is also a Graduate and having B.Ed. Qualification. He has also
passed the TAIT Examination. Hence, he may be allowed for registration
of self certification/assessment through the Pavitra Portal.
5. Mr. Uttam Bondar, Advocate who appears for respondent
No.2, though do not dispute passing of such judgment by this Court
covering the issue, however, seeks some more time to take instructions in
the matter.
6. Thus, taking into consideration the aforesaid submissions,
and the judgment delivered by this Court, I am inclined to pass the
interim order, as under :-
ORDER
[I] The respondent No.2 is directed to permit the
petitioner for registration of self-certification/assessment through Pavitra
Portal for TAIT-2025 during the pendency of this petition.
[II] The learned counsel for respondent No.2 undertakes
to inform the concerned about passing of the order by this Court
permitting the petitioner for registration of self-certification/assessment
through Pavitra Portal, so that the necessary registration process, which is
scheduled for today, shall be undertaken to allow the petitioner to
register.
[III] Parties to act upon the authenticated copy of this
oder.
[IV] Stand over to 12th January, 2026.
[MEHROZ K. PATHAN]
JUDGE.
grt/-
