Bombay High Court

POOJA KIRAN DABHADE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petition is partly allowed and the respondent must consider the appointment proposal without insisting on TET qualification.

Summary

The petitioners, Pooja Kiran Dabhide and another, sought relief against the State of Maharashtra concerning the appointment of Petitioner No.1. The Court noted that the issue was already decided in Pathan Farhat Anjum Aasif Khan v. State of Maharashtra (2025). Relying on that precedent and the decision in Anjuman Ishaat‑E‑Taleem Trust v. State of Maharashtra, the Court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's proposal for appointment without requiring the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) qualification. Consequently, the writ petition was partly allowed. The order specifically instructs Respondent No.2 to act on the proposal forwarded by Petitioner No.2.

Issues considered

What is the applicability of the precedent set in Pathan Farhat Anjum Aasif Khan v. State of Maharashtra to the present appointment dispute?
Whether the requirement of TET qualification can be waived for the appointment of Petitioner No.1 in view of the Anjuman Ishaat‑E‑Taleem Trust decision.

Subjects

appointment
TET qualification
writ petition
partial allowance
educational trust
state recruitment

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:34980


                                                   *1*                    18-wp-9246-2026


                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                 18 WRIT PETITION NO. 9246 OF 2026

                           POOJA KIRAN DABHADE AND ANOTHER
                                           VERSUS
                        THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
                                              ...
                Mr. Sayyed Tauseef Yaseen, Advocate for the Petitioner
                Ms. N. B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents/State
                                              ...
                                  CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI &
                                            ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
                                  DATE : 6th AUGUST 2026

                P. C. :-

                1.         Issue raised in this petition is squarely covered by the
                decision of this Court in Pathan Farhat Anjum Aasif Khan and
                Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. (Writ Petition No.13452
                of 2025).
                2.         For the reasons stated in the said decision, we pass the
                following order :
                                               :: ORDER ::

                       i.       Writ Petition is partly allowed.
                       ii.      We direct Respondent No.2 to consider the proposal
                       forwarded by Petitioner No.2 in respect of appointment of
                       Petitioner No.1, without insisting on TET qualification, in
                       view of Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust vs. The State of
                       Maharashtra and Others, (supra).



                (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)                 (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)

                Narwade

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…