1087 WP NO. 5733 OF 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5733 OF 2025 KUSUM PANDIT PADAVI AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS … • Mr. Thombre S.S., Advocate for the Petitioners • Mr. S. P. Sonpawale, AGP for Respondents/State • Mr. V. V. Gujar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4 to 8 … CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. DATE : 01.07.2025 PER COURT : 1. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioners submits that the issue arising in this petition is covered by judgment and order dated 21.04.2025 passed by Division Bench of this Court at the Principal Seat in Writ Petition No.568 of 2025. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondent- Zilla Parishad agrees to the said submission as the issue arising in the present case is identical. 3. Hence, Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 4. In the aforesaid judgment of this Court dated 21.04.2025 1/3 2025:BHC-AUG:16910-DB 1087 WP NO. 5733 OF 2025 passed in Writ Petition No.568 of 2025 (Manoj Gopal Mahale & Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Others) it was held as follows:- “10. In the instant case, it is undisputed that the Petitioners were selected and appointed on the basis of their CTET eligibility and their common termination order dated 14th October, 2023 was issued only for the reason that their names figure amongst those 7500 candidates whose TET results have been cancelled considering the scam controversy. It cannot be ignored that these Petitioners were appointed on qualifying the CTET, and not on the basis of their TET results. 11. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is partly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) 12. The Zilla Parishad, Solapur shall order the reinstatement of the Petitioners with effect from 2nd May, 2025 and would calculate their unpaid salaries/back wages to be paid to them and further make such payments, within a period of 60 days from today. 13. We make it clear that in the event the Petitioners are finally held to be guilty of benefiting from the TET scam and if it is concluded that they were the beneficiaries of such a scam, it would be open to the Zilla Parishad to review the appointments 2/3 1087 WP NO. 5733 OF 2025 of the Petitioners in light of such a judgment delivered by the Court. 14. Rule is made partly absolute in the above terms.” 5. Since the parties consent that the present petition can also be disposed of in view of identical facts, in the same manner as quoted hereinabove, the writ petition is partly allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’. 6. We also make it clear that in the event petitioners are eventually found guilty of benefiting from the TET scam and if it is concluded that they were beneficiaries of such scam, it would be open for respondent - Zilla Parishad to review their appointments in the light of the judgment delivered by this Court. 7. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. 8. Pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.) jhs/ 3/3