HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15624 of 2025 Court No. - 32 HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J. 1. Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pranav Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents. 2.Petitioners have come up before this Court that they were appointed as Assistant Teachers in the Madarsa after following due process and under permission of District Minority Welfare Officer. 3. It is not under much dispute that petitioners are aggrieved since by impugned order dated 4.8.2025, the Registrar, Uttar Pradesh. Madarsa Education Board has communicated the District Minority Welfare Officer that in pursuance of a Circular dated 20.5.2025, no fresh appointment be approved in the Madarsa. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners refers a Circular dated 20.5.2025 which is placed on record that essential qualifications for appointment of Teachers in Madarsa are required to be re-determined in view of judgment passed by the Supreme Court, therefore, fresh appointments be made after re-determination if any. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that he has no specific instructions about present status of exercise of re-determination regarding qualifications for appointment of Teachers in Madarsa since it requires a due process and amendments are also required in the present Act and it has to be placed before Legislature also. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Prabhakar Awasthi, Prateeyush Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pranav Mishra Mohd. Arif And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. I have considered the above submissions and perused the records. 7. As referred above, learned counsel for the respondents is not been able to show any irregularity in the process of appointment of petitioners in the Madarsa and vide Circular dated 20.5.2025, further appointments were stopped, therefore, it may be a case of the petitioners that in terms of circular existing as on date, claim of the petitioners can still be considered, though it would be subject to above amendment, if carried out. 8. Court also takes note that in case of any amendment, which would create an ambiguity, then it would be against the interest of petitioners also, therefore, an immediate direction to consider the proposal on petitioners' appointment in terms of the provision existing as on date would not be justified, therefore, 8 weeks time is granted to the concerned respondent to get clarity on the position taken in terms of Circular letter dated 20.5.2025 and in case after the aforesaid period, there is no change in the present position of law, a fresh decision shall be taken by the Registrar, Uttar Pradesh Madarsa Education Board on basis of existing provisions and he will also act expeditiously.In case of amendments, its legal consequence would follow. 9. With aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of. October 17, 2025 SB WRIA No. 15624 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP BHATTACHARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad