Bombay High Court
Kashinath S/O Kisanrao Tikode And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Its ... on 13 November, 2025
Author: M. S. Jawalkar
Bench: M. S. Jawalkar
1 WP 6026.18 (J).odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 6026 OF 2018
with
WRIT PETITION NO. 6056 OF 2018
........
WRIT PETITION NO. 6026 OF 2018
PETITIONERS : 1] Kashinath S/o Kisanrao Tikode,
Age 51 years, Occu. Service,
2] Milind S/o Natthuji Athawale,
Age 52 years, Occu. Service,
Both r/o Kalakamtha, Tq. Malegaon,
Dist. Washim.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS : 1] The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2] The Commissioner,
Tribal Development Department, Nashik.
3] The Additional Commissioner,
Tribal Development, Amravati.
4] The Project Officer,
Integrated Tribal Development Project,
Akola, Dist. Akola.
With
WRIT PETITION NO. 6056 OF 2018
PETITIONER : Nagorao S/o Kolshiram Khade,
Age 55 years, Occu. Service,
R/o Vilegaon, Tq. Manora, Dist. Washim.
VERSUS
2 WP 6026.18 (J).odt
RESPONDENTS : 1] The State of Maharashtra,
(through its Secretary,
Tribal Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2] The Commissioner,
Tribal Development Department, Nashik.
3] The Additional Commissioner,
Tribal Development, Amravati.
4] The Project Officer,
Integrated Tribal Development Project,
Akola, Dist. Akola.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. V. A. Dhakne, Advocate for the petitioners
Ms. Hemlata Jaipurkar, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 to 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR and
M. W. CHANDWANI, JJ.
DATE : NOVEMBER 13, 2025.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per M.W.Chandwani, J.)
1. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of
the learned counsels appearing for the parties, the matters are taken
up for final disposal.
2. The issue involved in these petitions is squarely covered
by the decision of the Supreme Court and various decisions of this
Court holding that the Teachers possessing B.P.Ed. qualification,
working in a primary school are entitled to the pay-scale of Trained
3 WP 6026.18 (J).odt
Teachers.
3. The petitioners in W.P. No. 6026/18 have been
appointed as 'Assistant Teacher' with Late Sushilabai Deshmukh Aided
Tribal Ashram School, Kalakamtha and the petitioner in W.P. No.
6056/18 has been appointed as 'Assistant Teacher' in Matoshri
Shevantabai Aided Tribal Ashram School, Vilegoan, Tq. Manora, Dist.
Washim, controlled by respondent nos.2 and 3. As per Government
Resolution dated 23.07.2018, Assistant Teachers having B.P.Ed.
Qualification, working with the tribal ashram schools controlled by
the Tribal Development Department, are treated as Trained Teachers.
4. The only contention which has been raised by the learned
AGP appearing for respondent nos. 1 to 4 is that the petitioners be
treated as Trained Teachers from the date of issuance of the
Government Resolution dated 23.07.2018.
5. We have perused the G.R. dated 23.07.2018, more
particularly Clause-B, which reads as under :
c) आदिवासी अनुदानित व शासकीय प्राथमिक आश्रमशाळे त या
प्रशिक्षित (बी.एड.) पदवीधर शिक्षकांसाठी अनुज्ञेय असलेल्या २५ %
पदांव्यतिरिक्त इतर कोणत्याही प्राथमिक शिक्षकांच्या पदावर
(डी.एड. अर्हता धारण न करणारे ) पदवीधर व बी.एड.
शिक्षकांच्याही नियुक्त्या के ल्या असल्यास अशा शिक्षकांना त्यांच्या
4 WP 6026.18 (J).odt
नियुक्तीच्या दिनांकापासून प्रशिक्षित शिक्षक समजण्यात यावे. अशा
शिक्षकांना त्यांच्या नियुक्तीच्या वेळी देय असलेली डी.एड. प्रशिक्षित
शिक्षकाची वेतनश्रेणी (आता वेतनबँड रु.५२००-२०२०० + ग्रेड पे
रु.२८००) देय राहील. जर शिक्षण सेवक म्हणून सेवेत असल्यास
त्यांना शिक्षण सेवकांचा परिविक्षाधीन कालावधी पूर्ण के ल्यानंतरच ही
वेतनश्रेणी लागू करण्यात यावी.
6. Perusal of Clause-B of the G.R. makes it clear that the
Assistant Teachers who possess B.P.Ed. qualification at the time of
their appointment shall be treated as Trained Teachers from the date
of their appointment.
7. There is no dispute that petitioner nos.1 and 2 in W.P.
No.6026/18 were appointed as Assistant Teacher on 01.05.1995 and
01.07.1994, respectively and the petitioner in W.P. No. 6056/18 was
appointed on 01.07.1993. The qualification of the petitioners on the
date of their appointment has also not been disputed. Thus, it is
crystal clear that on the date of appointment of the petitioners, they
were possessing B.P.Ed. Degree.
8. Therefore, in wake of Government Resolution dated
23.07.2018 and the decision of this Court in the case of Madan S/o
Sawairam Ade .vs. State of Maharashtra and others (Writ Petition No.
3065/2020) (Bench at Aurangabad), decided on 12.08.2025, we are
5 WP 6026.18 (J).odt
of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled for the pay-scale of a
Trained Teacher from the date of their appointment.
9. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed in terms of
prayer clause (B) -
"To direct the respondent no. 3 to grant the pay scale of
trained primary teacher to the petitioners from the date
of their initial appointments and to pay the arrears of
salary to the petitioners from the date of their initial
appointments till the date on which the petitioners were
granted the pay scale of trained primary teacher with all
other consequential benefits, by issuing a writ of
mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or
direction as the case may be."
10. Respondent no.3 - The Additional Commissioner, Tribal
Development Department, Amravati shall pass necessary orders in this
regard within six months from today and pay the arrears to the
petitioners.
11. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. The writ
petitions stand disposed of. No order as to costs.
(M.W.CHANDWANI, J.) (SMT. M.S.JAWALKAR, J.)
Diwale
Signed by: DIWALE
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 15/11/2025 12:36:53
