Disposed¶22

Allahrakhi Chiraguddin Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC4 Nov 2025WP/10371/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

TET; teacher continuance till superannuation; less than five years service left; Article 142 Constitution of India; Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust v. State of Maharashtra; Civil Appeal No.1385 of 2025; order dated 23.12.2024 set aside; Shalartha-ID; Deputy Director of Education Nashik Region; promotion barred without TET; Allahrakhi Chiraguddin Shaikh; State of Maharashtra; writ petition disposed; Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench; November 04, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 23.12.2024 set aside; respondent no.2 directed to forward the proposal to respondent no.3 (Deputy Director of Education, Nashik Region) within three weeks; respondent no.3 to include the petitioner's name in "Shalartha-ID" as per the proposal of respondent nos.4 and 5; consequential benefits to follow. ¶22

Allahrakhi Chiraguddin Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 23.12.2024, passed solely on the ground that the petitioner had not cleared the TET examination, can be sustained in view of paragraph 216 of Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust (SC), under which teachers with less than five years' service left may continue till superannuation without qualifying TET (subject to the promotion restriction).

¶21

Court's answer

In view of paragraph 216 of Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust (SC, Civil Appeal No.1385 of 2025, decided 1.9.2025), teachers who have less than five years' service left are allowed to continue in service till they attain the age of superannuation without qualifying the TET; the petitioner, whose remaining service is four years and nine months, falls within this direction.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner, upon instructions, made a statement through learned counsel that she is not going to claim any promotion, satisfying the condition in paragraph 216 that a teacher with less than five years' service left who aspires for promotion would not be eligible without qualifying the TET.

¶16

Key takeaways

Since the impugned order dated 23.12.2024 was passed only on the ground of non-clearance of TET, it is set aside in view of paragraph 216 of Anjuman-Ishaat (supra).ratio¶21
Respondent no.2 is directed to forward the proposal to the Deputy Director of Education, Nashik Region (respondent no.3) within three weeks; respondent no.3 is to take up further procedure to include the petitioner's name in "Shalartha-ID" as per the proposal of respondent nos.4 and 5, and consequential benefits would follow.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (Vibha Kankanwadi and Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ., per court) disposed of a writ petition filed by a teacher whose order dated 23.12.2024 was passed solely because she had not cleared the TET examination. Applying paragraph 216 of Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust v. State of Maharashtra (Supreme Court, Civil Appeal No.1385 of 2025, decided 1.9.2025), wherein the Supreme Court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to permit teachers with less than five years' service left to continue till superannuation without qualifying TET (while barring promotion for such teachers without TET qualification), and noting that the petitioner had four years and nine months of service left and had undertaken not to claim any promotion, the Court set aside the impugned order, directed respondent no.2 to forward the proposal to the Deputy Director of Education, Nashik Region within three weeks, and directed that the petitioner's name be included in "Shalartha-ID" as per the proposal of respondent nos.4 and 5, with consequential benefits to follow.

¶1

2025:BHC-AUG:30364-DB

¶2

wp 10371.25.odt

¶3

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

903 WRIT PETITION NO. 10371 OF 2025

¶6

Allahrakhi Chiraguddin Shaikh

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

¶9

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S.R. Kolhare AGP for Respondents : Mr. R.S. Wani

¶10

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI

¶11

AND

¶12

HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ. Dated : November 04, 2025

¶13

PER COURT :-

¶14

In view of our order dated 3.10.2025, learned AGP has taken instructions from respondent no.2. He submits that petitioner's service that has been left is to the extent of four years and nine months.

¶15

In view of the observations in paragraph no.216 in Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others (Civil Appeal No.1385 of 2025) decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 1.9.2025, the teachers, who have less than five years service left, have been allowed to continue in service till they attain the age of superannuation without qualifying the “TET.”

¶16

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, upon instructions, makes a statement that, petitioner is not

¶17

wp 10371.25.odt

¶18

¶19

going to claim any promotion. For our convenience, we reproduce paragraph no.216, which reads thus :-

¶20

“216. Bearing in mind their predicament, we invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and direct that those teachers who have less than five years’ left, as on date, may continue in service till they attain the age of superannuation without qualifying the TET. However, we make it clear that, if any such teacher (having less than five years’ service left) aspires for promotion, he will not be considered eligible without he/she having qualified the TET.

¶21

It can be seen that the impugned order dated 23.12.2024 has been passed only on the ground that the petitioner has not cleared ‘TET’ examination, however, in view of paragraph no.216 of Anjuman-Ishaat (supra), we set aside the impugned order dated 23.12.2024. Respondent no.2 is therefore now directed to forward the proposal to Deputy Director of Education, Nashik Region, Nashik i.e. respondent no.3 within a period of Three (3) weeks from today. Respondent no.3 to take up further procedure to include name of the petitioner in “Shalartha-ID” as per the proposal of respondent nos.4 and 5. The consequential benefits would then follow.

¶22

With these observations, writ petition stands disposed of .

¶23

( HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. ) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )

¶24

aaa-

Allahrakhi Chiraguddin Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Allahrakhi Chiraguddin Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagubai Shripatrao Shewale and Others vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mandodari Sonaji Panchal and Others vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vasant Kishanrao Jadhav and Others vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mohammad Khaja Education and Welfare Society Nanded Thr Its Secretary Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Others

Leela Tukaram Toge Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Sayyed Ajmeri Gousomohiuddin Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others