JUDGMENT S.S. Shinde, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard finally. 2. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners in these writ petitions, the learned Additional Government Pleader and learned counsel appearing for other respondents, jointly submit that, since the points/issues raised in all these petitions are similar, all these petitions can be heard together and disposed of by common judgment and order. Learned counsel for the petitioners in respective petitions submit that, writ petition No. 7106 of 2013 and writ petition No. 7660 of 2013 should be considered as lead petitions and the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioners in those writ petitions would be adopted by other respective counsel appearing in respective petitions. In the light of above, this Court has proceeded to hear all these petitions together, and same are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 3. As already observed herein before, all petitions raises similar controversies/issues, it would be relevant to state briefly the facts leading for filing the aforementioned writ petitions. 4. The petitioners in all these petitions were working as Craft Instructors or (physical Instructors) or Sports and health Instructors in Primary school run by the Zilla Parishad Aurangabad, Beed, Hingoli, Nanded, Latur and other districts, which are within the jurisdiction of this Bench. Some of the petitioners were working since July 2010, some of them since July, 2011 and remaining from July, 2012 till their services came to an end. 5. It is the case of the petitioners that the State of Maharashtra has introduced a scheme of Shikshan Sevaks and Shikshan Instructors vide Government Resolution dated 13th October, 2000. Such Shikshan Sevaks were initially appointed on a fixed honorarium instead of pay-scales in Secondary and Higher Secondary Schools. The post of Shikshan Sevaks in the subjects of Sanskrit, Hindi, Drawing, Craft, Music, Tailoring, Physical Education, Drum Player, Stenographer, Typists, Physical Training Instructors, etc. came to be included, vide Government Resolution dated 18th December, 2003. The revised pay-scales prescribed for the Craft Teacher; Physical Training Education; and Drawing Teacher, was Rs. 5500-9000. However, it was decided to pay them honorarium of Rs. 4,500/- per month. 6. came to be included, vide Government Resolution dated 18th December, 2003. The revised pay-scales prescribed for the Craft Teacher; Physical Training Education; and Drawing Teacher, was Rs. 5500-9000. However, it was decided to pay them honorarium of Rs. 4,500/- per month. 6. It is the case of the petitioners that, immediately after the Right of Children to Free & Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter to be referred to as The RTE Act) was brought into force, it was provided under its schedule to sanction the posts of specialist teachers in order to ensure that children community should get training in Physical Education; Art and Craft in all the schools irrespective of number of students in each school. The Government further decided to retain the specialist teachers as separate wing for suitable deployment to all schools in the State, however, on part-time basis, popularly known as Anshakalin vide Government Resolution dated 18th June, 2010. 7. It is the case of the petitioners that the Government sanctioned the Part-time posts of Art Teachers; Craft Teachers and Physical instructors from time to time and made budgetary provisions, however, without prescribing the pay-scales to such posts. It was clarified that the Physical Instructors; Craft Teachers and Art Teachers, shall be paid as per the available work load, i.e. Clock Hour Basis (CHB), which is evident from the Government Resolution dated 7th December, 2011. 8. It is the case of the petitioners that, total 8577 posts of part-time Instructors in the subjects of Art, Craft and Physical Education were sanctioned; whereas, they were to be paid as per the sanctioned workload in 5th, 6th and 7th standards in the academic year 2012-2013, whereas the number has gone upto 10,068 in the year 2013-2014. It is the case of the petitioners that in order to implement the RTE Act, the Government of Maharashtra, not only sanctioned such posts of Part-time Instructors on clock hour basis in higher primary schools having classes of 5th, 6th and 7th standards, but paid them either honorarium or remuneration on clock hour basis. 9. It is the case of the petitioners that, the School Management Committees came to be constituted for each of the primary schools run and managed by the local authority so as to make appointments of such part-time instructors appointed on clock hour basis under the RTE Act. 10. 9. It is the case of the petitioners that, the School Management Committees came to be constituted for each of the primary schools run and managed by the local authority so as to make appointments of such part-time instructors appointed on clock hour basis under the RTE Act. 10. It is the case of the petitioners that although the RTE Act is brought into force w.e.f. 1st April, 2010, the National Advisory Council and the State Advisory Council, as constituted as per Sections 29 and 31 of the RTE Act, are not functioning in full fledged manner. It is the case of the petitioners that meanwhile the State of Maharashtra has decided to prepare a School Development Plan and bear financial responsibility so as to implement the provisions of the RTE Act. The Government of Maharashtra is yet to decide the terms and conditions; salary and allowances of such part-time teachers in the primary schools run by various Zilla Parishads in the State of Maharashtra. 11. It is the case of the petitioners that the State of Maharashtra has tentatively decided to create three (3) posts in every primary school, having minimum strength of 100 students; in each school, as referred to above, and fill in those posts temporarily, on clock hour basis till formulation of policy. Accordingly, the Project Director of Maharashtra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad (hereinafter referred to as the Parishad) directed the Zilla Parishads in the State of Maharashtra to fill in such posts on temporary and clock hour basis, in the primary schools, having 5th to 7th standards through School Management Committee of such schools. 12. It is the case of the petitioners that the School Management Committee of the respective primary schools of Zilla Parishads had invited applications for the post of Art teacher; Sports & Health Instructor and Craft Teachers by way of a Notification displayed on the Notice board of the respective schools. 13. It is the case of the petitioners that, they had applied for the post of Sports and Health Instructors or Craft Teachers or Art teachers pursuant to the notification, inviting the applications for the respective posts. The respective School Management Committee interviewed the candidates, who had applied for various posts and prepared a merit list on the basis of marks secured by them in the qualifying examinations. The respective School Management Committee interviewed the candidates, who had applied for various posts and prepared a merit list on the basis of marks secured by them in the qualifying examinations. The School Management Committee selected the petitioners for the post of either Sports and Health Instructors or Art Teachers or Craft Teachers and appointed them as such, however, on part time or on clock hour basis which is evident from some of the orders issued either in 2010, 2011 or 2012 by the School Management Committees of the respective primary schools run by the Zilla Parishads in the State of Maharashtra. 14. It is the case of the petitioners that their performance as part time instructors in the respective post is found satisfactory. Therefore, their services are continued for about 8-9 months in each year, however, subjected to intermittent breaks in their services. It is the case of the petitioners that the specialist teachers in the aforesaid subjects working in high schools are made permanent and after three years they are given the pay-scales prescribed for the post of Assistant Teachers, as revised from time to time. 15. It is the case of the petitioners that the Parishad has issued guidelines so as to appoint the specialist teachers on temporary and clock hour basis through school management committee till final decision of the Government, which is evident from the directives issued to the Municipal Commissioners of the Municipal Corporations, Chief Executive Officers of Zilla Parishads; Education Officers/Administrative Officers in Municipal Corporations, Block Education Officers in Municipal Corporations, Block Education Officers of the Panchayat Samitis, and Deputy Director of Education in Maharashtra. 16. It is the case of the petitioners that, meanwhile, the Government of Maharashtra has issued G.R. On 1.8.2013, clarifying that the grants so as to bear the salaries of teachers shall be made available. The ratio of financial contribution between the Central and State Government shall be 65:35, respectively. The post of the teachers in the subject of Arts, Craft and Health/Physical Education, are required to be made permanent and all such candidates appointed as Arts, Craft or Physical Instructors, are entitled to receive salary in the prescribed pay-scales. 17. It is the case of the petitioners that there is enough workload and in case the workload is found insufficient, the workload of some other subjects can be assigned to them. 17. It is the case of the petitioners that there is enough workload and in case the workload is found insufficient, the workload of some other subjects can be assigned to them. However, the plight of such specialist teachers in the subjects of Arts, Craft and Physical Education, has been miserable. It is the case of the petitioners that it is high time that the Government devises a policy to make such part time teachers permanent, particularly when enough workload is available in the respective subjects and revised policy of their absorption on permanent basis is introduced. 18. It is the case of the petitioners that, right to education is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21-A inserted by 86th Amendment of the Constitution. In order to implement the provisions of the RTE Act and further objectives thereof, it would be necessary that the posts of Art Teachers, Craft Teachers and Physical instructors are made permanent and prescribe them regular pay-scales. 19. It is the case of the petitioners that the schedule of the RTE Act lays down norms and standards for a school. Item (b) (3) of the Schedule provides for appointment of part-time Instructors where admission of children is above one hundred, for (A) Art Education (B) Health and Physical Education and (C) Work Education are prescribed in each school. Accordingly, the Government of Maharashtra has issued instructions so as to appoint part-time instructors through the school management committee on clock hour basis from 01-07-2012 till policy decision was taken in that regard vide circular dated 07-07-2012 whereas share of the Maharashtra Government shall be 181 Crores and 24 lacs as provided under the G.R. dated 01-08-2013. 20. It is the case of the petitioners that Section 19 of the RTE Act provides that no school shall be established or recognized, under Section 18, unless it fulfills the norms and standards specified in the schedule. Similarly, Section 25 of the RTE Act, provides that the State Government and the local authority i.e. Zilla Parishad of the respective districts shall ensure that the pupil-teacher ratio, as specified in the schedule is maintained in each school. 21. Similarly, Section 25 of the RTE Act, provides that the State Government and the local authority i.e. Zilla Parishad of the respective districts shall ensure that the pupil-teacher ratio, as specified in the schedule is maintained in each school. 21. It is the case of the petitioners that although the posts of part-time instructors for Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education one each, are prescribed in the norms and standards for a school, the State of Maharashtra is appointing such part-time instructors on CHB and thereby paying them a very meager amount by way of honorarium i.e. Rs. 5000/- p.m. The part-time instructors in Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education need to receive at least half of the pay-scales prescribed for full time teachers in subjects, such as science and mathematics, social studies, languages etc. The honorarium prescribed for part time instructors is a meager amount. 22. The petitioners are constrained to file these petitions aggrieved by the refusal of appointment to the petitioners as part time teachers and extract work from them on payment of meager amount on honorarium and giving breaks of about three months at the end of each academic year. The petitioners have challenged the said action in not appointing them with following prayers. “(A) To direct the respondents to create a permanent cadre of part-time instructors for Art Education, Physical Education and work Education as specified in Section 19 r.w. Schedule of the Right of Children of Free and Compulsory Education Act 2009 and Rule 20 of the Rules 2010 thereof in all the Zilla Parishad Schools having 5th to 7th standards and minimum strength of 100 students, in the State of Maharashtra by issuing a writ of mandamus, orders, directions or any other appropriate writ, as the case may be. (B) To direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners as part-time instructors for Art Education, Physical Education and Work Education pursuant to their selection by the School Management Committee of each of the Zilla Parishad Schools having strength of one hundred or more for academic year 2013-14 and continue them as such thereafter by issuing a writ of mandamus, orders, directions or any other appropriate writ, as the case may be. (C) To direct the respondents to prescribe pay-scales to the part-time instructors for Art Education, Physical Education and Work Education commensurate to their qualifications, which shall not be less than half of the pay-scales prescribed for full time teachers in the subjects of science and mathematics, social studies, languages and all other benefits such as medical facilities, pension, gratuity, provident fund etc at par for similar qualification, work and experience by issuing a writ of mandamus, orders, directions or any other appropriate writ, as the case may be.” 23. Mr. Talekar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in the group of these petitions submits that, the State Government and local authorities shall appoint part-time instructors for Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education as specified in the schedule laying down norms and standards for a school as prescribed under Section 19 of the Act. 24. It is submitted that the Government of Maharashtra ought to have prescribed terms and conditions of service for part-time instructors u/sec. 23 of the RTE Act r/w Rule 20 of the said Rules 2010. The Central Government or the local authority, as the case may be, shall notify terms and conditions of service and salary of teachers of schools owned and managed by them in order to create a professional and permanent cadre of teachers. The scales of pay and allowances, medical facilities, pension, gratuity, provident fund and other prescribed benefits for teachers shall be at par for similar qualification, work and experience. However, neither the State Government nor the local authority of the respective districts have prescribed salary and allowances and other conditions of part-time instructors. It is submitted that an amount of honorarium which is fixed as Rs. 5000/- p.m. is much less than the pay-scales that need to be prescribed for part-time instructors for Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education. 25. It is submitted that, the Government has failed to lay down a policy to create a permanent cadre of part-time instructors for Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education as provided under Rule 20 of the Rules of 2010. The academic year commenced from 17-06-2013, however appointments of part-time instructors are not made so far, for the reasons best known to the respondents. The academic year commenced from 17-06-2013, however appointments of part-time instructors are not made so far, for the reasons best known to the respondents. As a result, the students studying in primary schools having 5th, 6th and 7th standards are deprived of right of RTE Act. 26. It is submitted that, inaction on the part of respondents not to appoint part-time instructors for Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education by creating a permanent cadre of teachers long after commencement of the academic year 2013-2014 is arbitrary, discriminatory, unjust and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 21-A of Constitution of India. It is submitted that, inaction on the part of respondents to appoint part-time instructors for Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education is violative of section 19 r/w schedule of the RTE Act as well as Rule 20 of the said Rules and the policy resolutions as well as the guidelines issued by the State of Maharashtra from time to time. 27. Learned counsel for the petitioners to counter the affidavit in reply filed by the respondent-State authorities, relying upon the rejoinder affidavit and also short affidavit submits that the stance adopted by the respondent Nos 1 and 2 is quite contrary to the norms and standards for school provided under Section 19 r/w item (b) at serial No. 1 of Schedule of the RTE Act. 28. It is submitted that every primary school having classes of 5th to 7th standards shall have three part-time instructors, one each for Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education Admittedly, the Government of Maharashtra has sanctioned 8,577 posts of part-time instructors vide G.R. dated 7.12.2011 and additional posts of 10,068 came to be sanctioned for the academic year 2012-2013. The Government of Maharashtra was therefore under an obligation to fill in all 18,645 posts of part-time instructors that too on regular basis. 29. There is nothing in the RTE Act from which it can be inferred that all such part-time instructors are to be appointed on temporary or purely on clock hour basis. Similarly, there is nothing in the Act from which it can be inferred that all such part-time instructors are not to be given regular pay-scales. It is submitted that the respondents have failed to fulfill its obligation to appoint part-time instructors, on regular basis, which is contrary to the scheme of RTE Act. Similarly, there is nothing in the Act from which it can be inferred that all such part-time instructors are not to be given regular pay-scales. It is submitted that the respondents have failed to fulfill its obligation to appoint part-time instructors, on regular basis, which is contrary to the scheme of RTE Act. 30. The Government cannot offer a lame excuse so as not to fulfill its obligation by saying that no policy is devised nor recruitment Rules are framed. An inaction on the part of the Government not to frame recruitment Rules would not justify non-compliance of its obligation to fill in the posts of part-time instructors in Upper Primary Schools, as provided in Section 19 r/w the Schedule of the Act. It is submitted that the judgment cited in the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi and others, reported in 2006 (4) SCC 1 is not applicable to the facts of the case. In the said case, the Supreme Court was dealing with appointments made through back door entry, however, in the present case, the appointments were made by the School Management Committee that too by following proper procedure as prescribed in Section 21 of the RTE Act. 31. The Division Bench of High Court Bombay, Bench at Nagpur has directed to regularize the services of Lecturers in different departments of Government Polytechnics in the State of Maharashtra from 1.11.2013 with continuity of service for all other purposes, except monetary purposes from the date of their first appointment in a recent judgment delivered on 19.10.2013 in writ petition No. 2046 of 2010. 32. It is submitted that, the respondents are under an obligation to appoint part-time instructors for Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education. However none of the 18,645 posts of part-time instructors are filled in the year 2013-2014, under a false pretext that those posts were not sanctioned by the Project Approval Board, Government of India, Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi. 33. It is submitted that, non-sanction of the posts of part-time instructors by the Central Government would not rescue the respondents from performing its functions or discharging its duties prescribed under the RTE Act. 33. It is submitted that, non-sanction of the posts of part-time instructors by the Central Government would not rescue the respondents from performing its functions or discharging its duties prescribed under the RTE Act. As a matter of fact, 18,645 posts of part-time instructors were already sanctioned in the past and, therefore it was not necessary that such posts were required to be sanctioned in each successive years. 34. It is submitted that, the respondents have defied the mandate provided under Section 19 r/w the Schedule of the RTE Act. The RTE Act provides for right of children to free and compulsory education and, therefore, such right does not depend on the whims and fancies or sweet will of the Government. The respondents have no option but to fill in the posts of part-time instructors sanctioned by the State of Maharashtra, which are 18,645 in number. It is submitted that very purpose of the RTE Act would be defeated due to inaction on the part of the respondents. It is not optional either to fill in or not to fill in the posts of part-time instructors. On the contrary, it is obligatory to fill in posts of part-time instructors regardless as to whether the same are sanctioned by the Central Government or not. 35. It is submitted that the contention raised by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 that, the posts of part-time instructors are to be filled in purely on clock hour basis is without any legal basis. Such an approach is not expected that too from the State of Maharashtra, which is supposed to be a model employer. Such approach adopted by the respondents is deplorable and at the same time un-condemnable. It is submitted that the respondents can not mollify rigors of the RTE Act at its sweet will under any pretext. 36. Counsel for the petitioners further invited our attention to the G.R. dated 7.12.2011 issued by Under Secretary, School Education and Sports department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and submits that, under the circumstances the State of Maharashtra regularized the services of the para teachers in small helmets such as Vasti, Wadi, Pada, Tanda etc. vide Government Resolution dated 20.3.2001 issued by the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 37. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in respective petitions have adopted the arguments advanced by advocate Mr. vide Government Resolution dated 20.3.2001 issued by the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 37. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in respective petitions have adopted the arguments advanced by advocate Mr. Talekar, appearing for the petitioners in writ petition No. 7106 of 2013 and in some other writ petitions. In addition to that, advocate Mr. M.M. Joshi, submits that although, the posts of part time instructors of Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education one each are prescribed in the norms and standards for a school, the State of Maharashtra is appointing such part time instructors on CHB and thereby, paying them a very meager amount by way of honorarium i.e. Rs.5000/- p.m. The part time instructors in Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education need to receive at least half of pay scales prescribed for full time teachers in subject such as Science and Mathematics, Social Studies, languages etc. The honorarium prescribed for part time instructors is such a meager amount that, the petitioners are unable to make both the ends together. Mr. Joshi, learned counsel for petitioners in writ petition No. 2940 of 2014 submits that, the job of part time physical instructions is altogether different and they have to look after the interest of the children and to create congenial atmosphere so as to keep the physic of the children in fit condition. Therefore, the job of the part time Physical Instructor as contemplated under the RTE Act is altogether different. Therefore, counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitions deserve to be allowed. 38. To counter the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners, the learned Additonal Government Pleader, appearing for respondent State and its authorities has placed reliance on the affidavit in replies filed by one Mr. M.W. Joshi, the Joint Director, Quality, Maharashtra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad, Mumbai dated 29.11.2013 and 12.2.2014 and Mr. V.S. Mhatre, Joint Director (Administration) Maharashtra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad dated 19.3.2014 and one Mr. M. K. Phadke, Deputy Secretary, School Education department, Maharashtra State, Mumbai dated 26.3.2014. Relying upon the averments in the affidavit in replies filed from time to time, during pendency of these petitions, learned AGP submits that the State Government has taken all possible steps so as to comply with the provisions of RTE Act and Rules framed thereunder. M. K. Phadke, Deputy Secretary, School Education department, Maharashtra State, Mumbai dated 26.3.2014. Relying upon the averments in the affidavit in replies filed from time to time, during pendency of these petitions, learned AGP submits that the State Government has taken all possible steps so as to comply with the provisions of RTE Act and Rules framed thereunder. The State Government has already started implementation of the provisions of the RTE Act and Rules thereunder and also schedule by taking measures from the year 2011 to appoint the part time Instructors and also appoint on clock hour basis for temporary period. It is submitted that the State Government instructed the Parishad to appoint part time Instructors on clock hour basis for temporary period through local management. Accordingly, the local management has made appointments of the petitioners and other candidates for specific period on temporary basis. It is submitted that while making appointments, regular selection process has not been followed. The local management have committed irregularities and illegalities while appointing the candidates as part time Instructors and on clock hour basis. It is further submitted that the respondent authorities had conducted various meetings so as to formulate policy for implementation of provisions of RTE Act. It is submitted that the petitioners have no right to ask for regularization of their services since they were not appointed by following regular selection and also by proper selection committee. Their appointments were on clock hour basis for specific period and as soon as the said period come to an end, their services stood terminated on the last date mentioned in the said appointment letter. 39. In support of contention that, the petitioners cannot seek regularization of their services, learned Additional Government Pleader pressed into service various expositions of the Supreme Court, this Court and other High Courts. 39. In support of contention that, the petitioners cannot seek regularization of their services, learned Additional Government Pleader pressed into service various expositions of the Supreme Court, this Court and other High Courts. He placed reliance on unreported judgment of this court in the case of Megha Chandrakant Kale vs. State of Maharashtra (writ petition No. 8853 of 2013 with other connected writ petitions) decided on 12.3.2014 and in particular para 7 thereof and submits that, when the conditions are stipulated in the appointment letter in that case, the services are governed by the said conditions like this Court, held in the facts of Megha Kale (supra) that merely because a bond is executed by a candidate out of the Rules of Admission and further completion of bond period ipso facto does not confer any right on such candidate to seek public employment or status of permanency. Learned Additional government Pleader invited our attention to the para 28, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40 and 42 of the reported judgment in the case of State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi, (supra), and also on following judgments:- 1. Civil Appeal No. 2726-2729 of 2014 -Secretary to Government School Education vs. Thiru R. Govindswamy 2. Civil Appeal No. 3981 of 2006 - Surendra Prasad Tiwari vs. The State 3. 2013 (1) Supreme 577 - University of Rajasthan vs. Prem Lata Agrawal 4. 2004 (7) SCC 112 - A. Umarani vs Registrar, Co-operative Societies 5. 2009 (5) SCC 65 - State of Bihar vs. Upendra Narayan Singh 6. 2003 (3) SCC 485 - Chanchal Goyal vs. State of Rajasthan 7. 2011 (11) SCC 441 - State of U.P. vs. Rekha Rani 8. 1996 (11) SCC 77 - State of Haryana vs. Jasmer Singh 9. W.P. No. 10815 of 2012 - Parag Sheshrao Tayade vs. State of Maharashtra Relying on the observations made in the afore mentioned judgments, learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that, the petitioners have no right to ask for regularization of their services. 40. The learned Additional Government Pleader has submitted that, the Government of Maharashtra issued G.R. On 18.6.2010 so as to implement Article 21-A of the Constitution of India and the provision of RTE Act, sanctioning the post of part time instructor for Art, Health and Physical Education and Work Education, is provided under the schedule read with Section 19 and 25 of the RTE Act. 41. 41. It is submitted that, as per Sections 19 and 25 of the RTE Act, the Government of Maharashtra has issued said G.R. dated 18th June, 2010. In the year 2010-11, supplementary budget for 8577 posts of Part Time Instructors were sanctioned by the Government of India for the upper primary school where the strength of students for upper primary was more than 105 students. The prevailing system of upper primary was 5th to 7th standards and for these standards, posts were sanctioned. Considering the strength of students in 5th to 7th standards and budget allotted for this was Rs. 1286.55 Lakhs, vide letter dated 28th January, 2011 and guidelines were communicated to the local authorities and were directed to fill up the posts of part time instructors by Parishad. However, no posts were filled up of the Part Time Instructors in 2010-11, either by the Zilla Parishad or Municipal Corporation or Municipal Council. 42. The Government of Maharashtra issued G.R. on 7th December, 2011 thereby creating 8577 posts of Part Time Instructors as sanctioned by the Project Approval Board of Government of India, New Delhi. The said posts of Part Time Instructors were on clock hour basis @ 50/-per period and sanctioned the budget of Rs. 4288.5 Lakhs for the appointment of Part Time Instructors for the subject. This budget was approved in the Project Approval Board meeting dated 7th March, 2011. The Project Director of Parishad, Mumbai issued guidelines with prior approval of the Government of India, as per the conditions and budget sanctioned in 176th meeting of Project Approval Board and it is decided that the project approval board to fill up the post of Part Time Instructors purely on temporary and clock hour basis in the school having classes of 5th to 7th standards and the strength of students should be 105. 43. In the year 2012-13, the Ministry of Human Resources Development, New Delhi has sanctioned additional 10068 new posts of Part Time Instructors in addition to previous 5877 posts. 43. In the year 2012-13, the Ministry of Human Resources Development, New Delhi has sanctioned additional 10068 new posts of Part Time Instructors in addition to previous 5877 posts. The advertisement for appointment of Part Time Instructors in para No. 14 Page No. 27 of Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013, the petitioners admitted that school Management Committee of the respective primary schools of Zilla Parishad had invited applications for the Art Teacher, Physical Instructors and Work Education Teachers by way of the notification advertised on a notice on the school board which indicates that, there is no proper advertisement to fill up the said post and no wide publicity for the said advertisement was given. It is accepted that, as per the directions of Parishad the said advertisement have been issued then also the proper selection process is adopted, does not prove. 44. In the Schedule of RTE Act read with Section 19 and 25, the norms and standard for the school has been mentioned in which there is a reference of Part Time Instructors. In the said schedule, the word used as ‘Part Time Instructors’ which also indicates that, the legislature of Government of Maharashtra has intended to appoint the Part Time Instructors on temporary basis as the word is used as ‘part time’. 45. It is submitted that the school management committee as per the direction of the local authorities appointed Part Time Instructors and in each and every appointment order, period of appointment is mentioned. The said appointments are purely on temporary and clock hour basis. The said appointments are done by the school management committee. The school management committee has not conducted written examination for the said appointments and the procedure for the selection process, which is laid down in several judgments of Supreme Court, is not expected to be followed for the said appointments as the said appointments are purely on temporary and clock hour basis. Therefore the Petitioners i.e. Part Time Instructors cannot claim regularization in the said appointments. 46. It is submitted that, the Parishad has directed to cancel the appointments of Part Time instructors before completion of the period mentioned in the appointment order, therefore, some of the instructors have filed Writ Petition No. 7359 of 2012 and other connected petitions, in this Hon’ble High Court thereby challenging the intermediate termination. 46. It is submitted that, the Parishad has directed to cancel the appointments of Part Time instructors before completion of the period mentioned in the appointment order, therefore, some of the instructors have filed Writ Petition No. 7359 of 2012 and other connected petitions, in this Hon’ble High Court thereby challenging the intermediate termination. After hearing the parties, this Hon’ble High Court, by order dated 5th September, 2012 granted status-quo in favour of the said instructors and thereafter by order dated 7th September, 2012 passed the final order thereby confirmed the interim relief granted by this Court. 47. It is submitted that the paragraph no. 14 of the order dated 7th September, 2012 passed in Writ Petition No. 7359 of 2012 is in respect of directions issued by this Hon’ble High Court. Accordingly, this Hon’ble High Court has directed to the Joint. Director (Admn) M.P.S.P. Mumbai to allow all the Part Time Instructors and appoint under communication cited above by the respective Municipal Corporations, Zilla Parishad to discharge their duties as such under the conditions stipulated in respective appointment orders. It is further directed that, Part Time Instructors who can be relieved or removed as Part Time Instructors shall be under the above mentioned scheme shall be deemed to have been engaged as Part Time Instructors and they shall be allowed to discharge their duties in accordance with the conditions of the appointment letter. 48. Accordingly, it is clear that, this Court has directed to continue them as per the conditions mentioned in the appointment orders, in which specific period of appointment has been mentioned, therefore, it was expected to continue the said Part Time Instructors till completion of period mentioned in their respective appointment orders. The Parishad has issued letter dated 17th September, 2012 thereby intimated to all the local authorities to continue the Part Time Instructors as per the directions issued by this Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition No. 7359 of 2012. Accordingly, from annexures at page Nos. 159 to 161 of Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013, it appears that the local authorities have issued re-appointment order in favour of Part Time Instructors. This re-appointment order was as per the direction of Parishad and the same was as per the order of this Hon’ble High Court. Accordingly, from annexures at page Nos. 159 to 161 of Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013, it appears that the local authorities have issued re-appointment order in favour of Part Time Instructors. This re-appointment order was as per the direction of Parishad and the same was as per the order of this Hon’ble High Court. Hence, it is clear that, the Parishad as well as local authorities have followed the orders passed by this Hon’ble High Court and reappointed and allowed the Part Time Instructors to complete the tenure mentioned in their respective appointment orders. Hence the said order dated 7.9.2012 passed in Writ Petition No. 7359 of 2012 is complied with. 49. In the said circular, the Parishad has directed all the local authorities to follow the procedure prescribed in the RTE Act,. Accordingly, in condition No. 14 it is stated that, appointment of the Part Time Instructors should be made by the school management committee and as per the condition no. 15, it is stated that, these posts of Part Time Instructors should be filled in on clock hour and temporary basis. In condition No. 15-H the criteria of qualification for the appointment of Part Time Instructors is mentioned and the powers of appointments are given to School Management Committee. However, in the present case, it is not verified by the State Government or the Parishad; whether the school management committee has properly appointed the Part Time Instructors or not? and whether these Part Time Instructors fulfill the criteria, which is mentioned in the said circular? It is also not verified that, whether the school management committee properly followed the procedure for appointment or not? In view of this, the selection procedure for regular appointment is not expected to be followed as the said posts has to be filled in on temporary basis. The school management committee has not given appointments to the Part Time Instructors by conducting written examinations. There is no wide publicity for the said appointments, no names have been called from the office of Employment Exchange, no written examination has been conducted, no oral interviews are conducted by the expert selection committee, the school management committee does not consist experts for the appointment of Part Time Instructors. Therefore, it can be said that, for these appointments, no proper selection process is adopted. 50. Therefore, it can be said that, for these appointments, no proper selection process is adopted. 50. The Ministry of Human Resources Department, School Education Department and Literacy held 192nd project approval board meeting, on 18th February, 2013, for the approval of Annual Work Plan and budget of Maharashtra. The said meeting is conducted under the Chairmanship of Secretary (SE & L), Ministry of Human Resources Department. In the said meeting, the Government of India i.e. Ministry of H.R.D. of School Education and Literacy, specifically observed in clause No. II that the State has fulfilled most of the commitments made in the last project approval board and rests are under process. There in all 24 main activities under the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and several other sub activities comes under it. The activity of appointment of Part Time Instructors comes at Sr. No. 9.3 and 9.12. In the said meeting the Ministry of H.R.D. of School Education and Literacy Department has not sanctioned budget for some of the activities under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. Accordingly, the budget was also not sanctioned for the Part Time Instructors i.e. Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education. The chart given along with the affidavit filed by the Joint Director (Admn.) M.P.S.P. Shri Waman Sakharam Mhatre, shows that in the said 192nd meeting, the Central Government has not sanctioned budget for the activity of appointment of Part Time Instructors for the year 2013-14. 51. Earlier for 2010-1011, in supplementary budget, 8577 posts of Part Time Instructors have been sanctioned by the Government of India for the upper primary school, where the strength of students is more than 100 and therefore, for the year 2012-13 the Ministry of H.R.D. New Delhi approved 10068 additional posts of Part Time Instructors and thus total posts of Part Time Instructors become 18645 for the year 2012-13. However, thereafter for the year 2013-14, there is no budget sanctioned by the Ministry of H.R.D. New Delhi for the said activity of appointment of Part Time Instructors. There is no single appointment in the subject made on this post. The said sanctioned 18645 posts of Part Time Instructors were for that particular academic year i.e. for the year 2012-13. However, thereafter for the year 2013-14, there is no budget sanctioned by the Ministry of H.R.D. New Delhi for the said activity of appointment of Part Time Instructors. There is no single appointment in the subject made on this post. The said sanctioned 18645 posts of Part Time Instructors were for that particular academic year i.e. for the year 2012-13. At present, as there is no budget from the Central Government therefore, there is no single post sanctioned by the Parishad and also not directed to the local authorities to fill up the posts of part Time Instructors, as there is no budget. 52. In the present situation, the academic year 2013-14 comes to an end and almost it is concluded therefore, it is not possible to appoint Part Time Instructors in this year. Moreover, there is no fund available with the Parishad and/or with the State Government for the said appointments. As per said ‘Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan’, the Central Government i.e. Ministry of H.R.D. has to bear 65% of the expenses and State Government has to bear 35% of the expenses on the said ‘Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan’ Scheme. 53. At present examinations are going on and now regular classes of teaching are over, so there is no need of teaching at present, as a continuous comprehensive evaluation as taken place at the school level. G.R. dated 1.8.2013 issued by the Government of Maharashtra, School Education and Sports Department. 54. The petitioners are trying to show that, the budget is sanctioned by the Central Government for the year 2013-14 for Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan scheme and inspite of that, the Parishad are not appointing Part Time Instructors, the said contention of the petitioners is completely false and baseless. Under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan there are 24 main activities and several sub activities. The budget is sanctioned for rest of the activities. 16 sub activities have been deleted in the year and budget is not sanctioned by the Central Government for the said 16 sub activities. The said G.R. is in respect of the rest of the activities for which the budget has been sanctioned. The amount of 33659.48 lakhs is sanctioned by the Central Government and the amount of Rs. 1812.4 lakhs is contributed by the State Government for the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan in respect of the activities. The said G.R. is in respect of the rest of the activities for which the budget has been sanctioned. The amount of 33659.48 lakhs is sanctioned by the Central Government and the amount of Rs. 1812.4 lakhs is contributed by the State Government for the Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan in respect of the activities. Therefore, contention of the petitioner that, budget is sanctioned for Part Time Instructors for the year 2013-14 is completely false and baseless. 55. The Parishad by letter dated 10.3.2013 intimated all the local authorities that, the 16 activities mentioned in the said letter have not been funded by the Ministry of H.R.D. New Delhi and there is a reference of meeting of Project Approval Board dated 18.2.2013. 56. It is submitted that, in Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013 the Joint Director (Quality) M.P.S.P., Shri Narayan Wamanrao Joshi, in affidavit in reply, specifically stated in para No. 20 that, regular procedure is not followed for recruitment of Part Time Instructors i.e. Age Limit, reservation etc., Recruitment Rules and service conditions for appointment of regular teachers are completely different and they are recruited for a particular subject. Hence the condition regarding adoption of regular procedure for the said recruitment is denied, in affidavit. 57. The petitioners are relying on the judgment passed in Writ Petition No. 2046 of 2010 by this Court (Nagpur Bench), however, in para no. 14 of the said judgment, it is specifically stated that, ‘in the present case the petitioners have been appointed after the posts were advertised, they were selected in a selection process by Committee of Experts duly constituted as per the said Government Resolution.” Accordingly, it can be said that, in that case, committee of experts was constituted and posts were advertised properly but in present case advertisement was not published and committee of experts was not constituted for selection. 58. 58. This Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition No. 928 of 2014 and along with Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013 and other petitions, in order dated 20th February, 2014 observed in para No. 4 that, “we are granting time as prayed by the Respondent and that too of eight weeks, but on the condition that, the petitioners can be considered and duly appointed by the Zilla Parishads for the ensuing academic sessions, provided that, they comply with all the requirements and eligibility and experience and the students pupil ratio.” Accordingly, it is clear that, this Hon’ble High Court directed to consider the petitioners for the ensuing academic session however, the present session is now comes to an end and ensuing session yet not started. Moreover, the time granted by this High Court by order dated 20.2.2014 has come to an end on 17.4.2014. Therefore, at present there is no breach of any order of this Hon’ble High Court. Moreover, it is submitted that, considering the petitioners provided to comply with all the requirement and eligibility and experience and the student pupil ratio. 59. It is submitted that, all the orders passed by this Court are followed and there is no breach of any order of this Court. Therefore, contempt petition filed by the petitioners is not maintainable. 60. It is submitted that, draft of policy document for appointment of part time teachers for Art, Physical and Work Education is prepared by the Government. Therefore, relying upon various submissions in the affidavit in reply, judgment of the Supreme Court and this court and written notes of arguments placed on record, the Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State and State authorities submits that writ petitions are devoid of any merits and the same may be dismissed. 61. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 in writ petition No. 2864 of 2014 and some other writ petitions submits that in writ petition No. 7307 of 2012 which is filed by the petitioners mainly against the Zilla Parishad, Nanded and against the Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar and other Zilla Parishads, no order are passed in respect of Aurangabad Municipal Corporation dated 7.9.2012 and also order in writ petition No. 7359 of 2012, the Corporation is not party and all the matters relate to the Zilla Parishad Nanded and others and the respondent No.4 is not party to the order dated 12th February, 2014. It is submitted that respondent No.4, as per directions issued by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 dated 19th March, 2013, not continued the part time instructors from the academic year 2013-14. Only appointments are given for a period of five months from the academic year 2012-13. 62. It is submitted that, the prayers in all writ petitions are similar and such prayers cannot be granted. As per the settled provisions of law, writ of mandamus cannot be issued for creation of permanent cadre and also appoint the petitioners by giving go bye to the regular selection process, as the part-time teachers who are appointed by Adhoc committee i.e. School Management Committee of the Municipal Council and also concerned Gram Panchayat, no any regular process is followed. However, the reliefs which are sought to prescribe the pay scale to the part-time instructors and other benefits of permanency which are available to the confirmed and permanent teachers. 63. Learned counsel further submits that in all these petitions, there is no prayer for regularization of services of the part-time instructors, however, whole arguments are advanced and prayer is made to regularize the services of the part time instructors to implement the RTE Act. It is settled position that, prayer for regularization which is not in the petition and such relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be granted to the petitioners. 64. The learned counsel for Municipal Corporation further submits that this Court while deciding the similar batch of three petitions in which prayer is made and challenge is also of similar nature in respect of part-time instructors, has rejected the petition on 20.3.2014. 65. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, by filing rejoinder, invited our attention to unreported judgment of this Court in the case of Sachin Ambadas Dawale and others vs. the State of Maharashtra and another, delivered on 19.10.2013 in writ petition No. 2046 of 2010 and submits that this Court, in some what similar facts situation, has directed the respondent State to regularize the services of such of the petitioners when they completed more than three years of service and confer permanency on such petitioners who have completed three years of service with technical break, the respondents were directed to absorb the petitioners within a period of six weeks. It is submitted that in that case, also there was no regular selection process by the Parishad as contemplated under Rules, however, this court has directed the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner therein. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners also invited our attention to the reported judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Gujarat and others vs. P.W.D. Employees Union, reported in 2013 (12) SCC 417 and in particular para 28 thereof and submitted that in the facts of that case, the Supreme Court held that though the petitioners therein were appointed on daily wagers, labourers and workers employed for preservation and repairing construction in various departments of the State, in view of Government Resolution, the eligibility, daily wages workers working in Forest and Environment department for more than five years, are entitled for regularization of their services. 66. We have given careful consideration to the arguments advanced by the counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Pleader for the State and State authorities and Parishad, respective counsel appearing for the respondent Zilla Parishad, and with able assistance of the counsel appearing for the parties, we have carefully perused the pleadings in the petitions, grounds taken therein and the annexures thereof, affidavit in reply filed by the respondent-State and State authorities and also the Zilla Parishad, provisions of Constitution of India, RTE Act and various judgments of the Supreme Court and this Court (cited supra), by the respective counsel. We find that the bunch of these petitions has raised and posed many questions for consideration, since prima facie, upon considering material placed on record, it appears that the State Government has not yet formulated the final policy though the provisions of RTE Act stipulates time limit of three years to formulate policy and to take steps, including appointment of part time Instructors in the subjects of Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education, and therefore, first two questions which arise for consideration in these writ petitions are;- (i) Whether the State Government is under obligation to formulate the policy so as to give meaning and effect to the provisions of RTE Act 2009? (ii) Whether the Constitution and also the provisions of the RTE Act mandates that the appropriate Government is under obligation to perform its role under the Constitution and provisions of RTE Act 2009? 67. (ii) Whether the Constitution and also the provisions of the RTE Act mandates that the appropriate Government is under obligation to perform its role under the Constitution and provisions of RTE Act 2009? 67. In this respect, it would be apt to reproduce herein below the statement of Objects and Reasons for bringing and incorporating Article 21-A of the Constitution of India. Statement of Objects and Reasons:- “(1) The Constitution of India in a Directive Principle contained in Art. 45, has made a provision for free and compulsory education for all children upto the age of fourteen years within ten years of promulgation of the Constitution. We would not achieve this goal even after fifty years of adoption of the provision. The task of providing education to all children in this age group gained momentum after National Policy Education (NPE) was announced in 1986. The Government of India, in partnership with the State government has made strenuous efforts to fulfill the mandate and though significant improvements were seen in various educational indicators, the ultimate goal of providing universal and quality education still remains unfulfilled. In order to fulfill this goal, it is felt that an explicit provisions should be made in the part relating to Fundamental Rights of the Constitution. The Statement of objects and reasons for bringing 83rd amendment Bill 1997 is as under:- (2) With a view to making right to free and compulsory education a fundamental right, the Constitution (83rd amendment) Bill 1997 was introduced in Parliament to insert a new Article, namely Art. 21-A, conferring on all children in the age group of 6 to 14 years to right to free and compulsory education. The said Bill was scrutinized by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the subject was also dealt with its 165th Report by the Law Commission of India. (3) After taking into consideration the report of the Law Commission of India and the Recommendation of the Standing Committee of Parliament proposed amendment to Part III, IV and part IV-A of the Constitution are being made which are as follows:- (a) To provide for free and compulsory education to children in the age group of 6 to 14 years for this purpose, a legislation should be introduced in Parliament after the Constitution (93rd Amendment) Bill 2001 is enacted. (b) To provide an Article 45 of the Constitution that the State shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education to children below the age of six years; and (c) To amend Art. 51A of the Constitution with a view to providing that it shall be the obligation on the parents to provide opportunities for education for their children. (4) The bill seeks to achieve the above objects.” 68. The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002 inserted Article 21-A in the Constitution of India to provide free and compulsory education of all children in the age group of six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in such a manner as the State may, by law, determine. The RTE Act represents the consequential legislation envisaged under Article 21-A, means that every child has a right to full time elementary education of satisfactory and equitable quality in a formal school which satisfies certain essential norms and standards. Article 21-A and the RTE Act came into effect on 1 April 2010. The title of the RTE Act incorporates the words ‘free and compulsory’. ‘Free education’ means that no child, other than a child who has been admitted by his or her parents to a school which is not supported by the appropriate Government, shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing elementary education. ‘Compulsory education’ casts an obligation on the appropriate Government and local authorities to provide and ensure admission, attendance and completion of elementary education by all children in the 6-14 age group. With this, India has moved forward to a rights based framework that casts a legal obligation on the Central and State Governments to implement this fundamental child right as enshrined in the Article 21A of the Constitution, in accordance with the provisions of the RTE Act. (i) Right of children to free and compulsory education till completion of elementary education in a neighbourhood school. (ii) It clarifies that ‘compulsory education’ means obligation of the appropriate government to provide free elementary education and ensure compulsory admission, attendance and completion of elementary education to every child in the six to fourteen age group. ‘Free’ means that no child shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing elementary education. ‘Free’ means that no child shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing elementary education. (iii) It makes provisions for a non-admitted child to be admitted to an age appropriate class. (iv) It specifies the duties and responsibilities of appropriate Governments, local authority and parents in providing free and compulsory education, and sharing of financial and other responsibilities between the Central and State Governments. (v) It lays down the norms and standards relating inter alia to Pupil Teacher Ratios (PTRs), buildings and infrastructure, school-working days, teacher-working hours. (vi) It provides for rational deployment of teachers by ensuring that the specified pupil teacher ratio is maintained for each school, rather than just as an average for the State or District or Block, thus ensuring that there is no urban-rural imbalance in teacher postings. It also provides for prohibition of deployment of teachers for non-educational work, other than decennial census, elections to local authority, State legislatures and Parliament, and disaster relief. (vii) It provides for appointment of appropriately trained teachers, i.e. teachers with the requisite entry and academic qualifications. (viii) It prohibits:- (a) Physical punishment and mental harassment. (b) Screening procedures for admission of children. (c) Capitation fee. (d) Private tuition by teachers. (e) Running of schools without recognition. (ix) It provides for development of curriculum in consonance with the values enshrined in the Constitution, and which would ensure the all-round development of the child, building on the child’s knowledge, potentiality and talent and making the child free of fear, trauma and anxiety through a system of child friendly and child centered learning.” “Article 21-A of the Constitution of India. The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine.” 69. In order to appreciate the provisions of RTE Act and to find out the role of the appropriate Government under the said Act, it would be apt to reproduce herein below the Statement of Objects and Reasons in enacting the RTE Act, which reads as under:- “Statement of Objects and Reasons.-the crucial role of universal elementary education for strengthening the social fabric of democracy through provision of equal opportunities to all has been accepted since inception of our Republic. The directive principles of State Policy enumerated in our Constitution lays down that the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children upto the age of fourteen years. Over the years there has been significant spatial and numerical expansion of elementary schools in the country, yet the goal of universal elementary education continues to elude us. The number of children, particularly children from disadvantaged groups and weaker sections, who drop out of school before completing elementary education, remains very large. Moreover, the quality of learning achievements is not always entirely satisfactory even in the case of children who complete elementary education.” 70. In the said Act, Section 1 states applicability of the Act. The said Act is made applicable to whole of India except the State of Jammu Kashmir and this Act is made subject to the provisions of Articles 29 and 30 of the Constitution of India. The provisions of this Act shall apply to conferment of rights on children to free and compulsory education. Sub-section (5) of Section 1 states that nothing contained in this act shall apply to Madarasas, Vedic, Pathsalas and educational institutions primarily imparting religious instruction. 71. In Section 2 (a) definitions of “appropriate Government” is given, which reads thus:- (a) Appropriate Government means:- (i) In relation to a school established, owned or controlled by the Central Government, or the administrator of the Union territory, having no Legislature, the Central government; (ii) In relation to a school, other than the school referred to in sub-clause (i), established within the territory of (A) a State, the State Government, (b) a Union territory having Legislature, the government of that Union territory.” 72. Upon perusal of definition of appropriate Government, reproduced herein above, in relation to school other the school referred in sub clause (i) established within the territory of State, the State Government is the appropriate government. Therefore, in the present case, appropriate government is the Government of Maharashtra. The said section also provides definition of capitation fee, child, child belonging to disadvantaged group, child belonging to weaker section, child with disability, child with severe disability, elementary education, guardian, local authority. Therefore, in the present case, appropriate government is the Government of Maharashtra. The said section also provides definition of capitation fee, child, child belonging to disadvantaged group, child belonging to weaker section, child with disability, child with severe disability, elementary education, guardian, local authority. The local authority is defined in section 2(h), which means a Municipal Corporation or Municipal Council or Zilla Parishad or Nagar Panchayat or Panchayat, by whatever name called, and includes such other authority or body having administrative control over the school or empowered by or under any law for the time being in force to function as a local authority in any city, town or village; 73. Section 2 further provides for definition of National Commission for protection of Child Rights, notification, parent, prescribed, schedule, school. In section 2 (n) school is defined as under:- 2 (n) School means any recognized school imparting elementary education and includes:- (i) A school established, owned or controlled by the appropriate government or a local authority. (ii) An aided school receiving aid or grants to meet whole or part of its expenses from the appropriate Government or the local authority. (iii) A school belonging to specified category. The said Section further provides that definition of screening procedure, specified category and State Commission for Protection of Child Rights. 74. Section 3 states about right of child to free and compulsory education. Section 4 provides for special provisions for children not admitted to, or who have not completed, elementary education. Section 5 provides of Right to transfer to other school. 75. Chapter III of RTE Act provides for duties of the appropriate Government, local authority and parents. Sections, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11 read thus:- “6. Duty of appropriate Government and local authority to establish school.- For carrying out the provisions of this Act, the appropriate Government and the local authority shall establish, within such area or limits of neighbourhood, as may be prescribed, a school, where it is not so established, within a period of three years from the commencement of this Act. (Emphasis supplied) 7. Sharing of financial and other responsibilities.- 1. The Central Government and the State Governments shall have concurrent responsibility for providing funds for carrying out the provisions of this Act. 2. The Central Government shall prepare the estimates of capital and recurring expenditure for the implementation of the provisions of the Act. 3. (Emphasis supplied) 7. Sharing of financial and other responsibilities.- 1. The Central Government and the State Governments shall have concurrent responsibility for providing funds for carrying out the provisions of this Act. 2. The Central Government shall prepare the estimates of capital and recurring expenditure for the implementation of the provisions of the Act. 3. The Central Government shall provide to the State Governments, as grants-in-aid of revenues, such percentage of expenditure referred to in sub-section (2) as it may determine, from time to time, in consultation with the State Governments. 4. The Central Government may make a request to the President to make a reference to the Finance Commission under sub-clause (d) of clause (3) of article 280 to examine the need for additional resources to be provided to any State Government so that the said State Government may provide its share of funds for carrying out the provisions of the Act. 5. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (4), the State Government shall, taking into consideration the sums provided by the Central Government to a State Government under subsection (3), and its other resources, be responsible to provide funds for implementation of the provisions of the Act. (Emphasis supplied) 6. The Central Government shall:- (a) Develop a framework of national curriculum with the help of academic authority specified under section 29. (b) Develop and enforce standards for training of teachers. (c) Provide technical support and resources to the State Government for promoting innovations, researches, planning and capacity building. 8. Duties of appropriate Government:- The appropriate Government shall -- (a) Provide free and compulsory elementary education to every child: Provided that where a child is admitted by his or her parents or guardian, as the case may be, in a school other than a school established, owned, controlled or substantially financed by funds provided directly or indirectly by the appropriate Government or a local authority, such child or his or her parents or guardian, as the case may be, shall not be entitled to make a claim for reimbursement of expenditure incurred on elementary education of the child in such other school. Explanation – The term compulsory education means obligation of the appropriate Government to-- (i) Provide free elementary education to every child of the age of six to fourteen years. Explanation – The term compulsory education means obligation of the appropriate Government to-- (i) Provide free elementary education to every child of the age of six to fourteen years. (ii) Ensure compulsory admission, attendance and completion of elementary education by every child of the age of six to fourteen years. (b) Ensure availability of a neighbourhood school as specified in section 6; (c) Ensure that the child belonging to weaker section and the child belonging to disadvantaged group are not discriminated against and prevented from pursuing and completing elementary education on any grounds; (d) Provide infrastructure including school building, teaching staff and learning equipment. (e) Provide special training facility specified in section 4. (f) Ensure and monitor admission, attendance and completion of elementary education by every child. (g) Ensure good quality elementary education conforming to the standards and norms specified in the Schedule. (h) Ensure timely prescribing of curriculum and courses of study for elementary education. (i) Provide training facility for teachers. (Emphasis supplied) 9. Duties of local authority:- Every local authority shall-- (a) Provide free and compulsory elementary education to every child: Provided that where a child is admitted by his or her parents or guardian, as the case may be, in a school other than a school established, owned, controlled or substantially financed by funds provided directly or indirectly by the appropriate Government or a local authority, such child or his or her parents or guardian, as the case may be, shall not be entitled to make a claim for reimbursement of expenditure incurred on elementary education of the child in such other school. (b) Ensure availability of a neighbourhood school as specified in section 6. (c) Ensure that the child belonging to weaker section and the child belonging to disadvantaged group are not discriminated against and prevented from pursuing and completing elementary education on any grounds. (d) Maintain records of children up to the age of fourteen years residing within its jurisdiction, in such manner as may be prescribed. (e) Ensure and monitor admission, attendance and completion of elementary education by every child residing within its jurisdiction. (f) Provide infrastructure including school building, teaching staff and learning material. (g) Provide special training facility specified in section 4. (h) Ensure good quality elementary education conforming to the standards and norms specified in the Schedule. (i) Ensure timely prescribing of curriculum and courses of study for elementary education. (f) Provide infrastructure including school building, teaching staff and learning material. (g) Provide special training facility specified in section 4. (h) Ensure good quality elementary education conforming to the standards and norms specified in the Schedule. (i) Ensure timely prescribing of curriculum and courses of study for elementary education. (j) Provide training facility for teachers. (k) Ensure admission of children of migrant families. (l) Monitor functioning of schools within its jurisdiction. (m) Decide the academic calendar. 11. Appropriate Government to provide for pre-school education:- With a view to prepare children above the age of three years for elementary education and to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years, the appropriate Government may make necessary arrangement for providing free preschool education for such children.” (Emphasis supplied). 76. Chapter IV provides for responsibilities of schools and teachers. The important Sections are Section 18 of the RTE Act provides for establishing of schools and no school can be established without obtaining certificate of recognition. Section 19 states norms and standard for school. Sections 18 and 19 read thus:- “18. No School to be established without obtaining certificate of recognition.- 1. No school, other than a school established, owned or controlled by the appropriate Government or the local authority, shall, after the commencement of this Act, be established or function, without obtaining a certificate of recognition from such authority, by making an application in such form and manner, as may be prescribed. 2. The authority prescribed under sub-section (1) shall issue the certificate of recognition in such form, within such period, in such manner, and subject to such conditions, as may be prescribed: Provided that no such recognition shall be granted to a school unless it fulfills norms and standards specified under section 19. 3. On the contravention of the conditions of recognition, the prescribed authority shall, by an order in writing, withdraw recognition: Provided that such order shall contain a direction as to which of the neighbourhood school, the children studying in the derecognized school, shall be admitted: Provided further that no recognition shall be so withdrawn without giving an opportunity of being heard to such school, in such manner, as may be prescribed. 4. With effect from the date of withdrawal of the recognition under sub-section (3), no such school shall continue to function. 5. 4. With effect from the date of withdrawal of the recognition under sub-section (3), no such school shall continue to function. 5. Any person who establishes or runs a school without obtaining certificate of recognition, or continues to run a school after withdrawal of recognition, shall be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees and in case of continuing contraventions, to a fine of ten thousand rupees for each day during which such contravention continues. (Emphasis supplied). 19. Norms and standards for school:- 1. No school shall be established, or recognized, under section 18, unless it fulfills the norms and standards specified in the Schedule. 2. Where a school established before the commencement of this Act does not fulfill the norms and standards specified in the Schedule, it shall take steps to fulfill such norms and standards at its own expenses, within a period of three years from the date of such commencement. 3. Where a school fails to fulfill the norms and standards within the period specified under subsection (2), the authority prescribed under sub-section (1) of section 18 shall withdraw recognition granted to such school in the manner specified under sub-section (3) thereof. 4. With effect from the date of withdrawal of recognition under sub-section (3), no school shall continue to function. 5. Any person who continues to run a school after the recognition is withdrawn, shall be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees and in case of continuing contraventions, to a fine of ten thousand rupees for each day during which such contravention continues.” (Emphasis supplied). 77. Section 20 provides for power to amend the Schedule by the Central Government. Section 21 provides for school management committee. Section 22 provides for school development plan. Section 23 provides of qualifications for appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers. Section 23 reads thus:- “23. Qualifications for appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers.- 1. Any person possessing such minimum qualifications, as laid down by an academic authority, authorized by the Central Government, by notification, shall be eligible for appointment as a teacher. 2. Section 23 reads thus:- “23. Qualifications for appointment and terms and conditions of service of teachers.- 1. Any person possessing such minimum qualifications, as laid down by an academic authority, authorized by the Central Government, by notification, shall be eligible for appointment as a teacher. 2. Where a State does not have adequate institutions offering courses or training in teacher education, or teachers possessing minimum qualifications as laid down under sub-section (1) are not available in sufficient numbers, the Central Government may, if it deems necessary, by notification, relax the minimum qualifications required for appointment as a teacher, for such period, not exceeding five years, as may be specified in that notification: Provided that a teacher who, at the commencement of this Act, does not possess minimum qualifications as laid down under sub-section (1), shall acquire such minimum qualifications within a period of five years. 3. The salary and allowances payable to, and the terms and conditions of service of, teachers shall be such as may be prescribed.” 78. Section 24 provides for duties of teachers and redressal of grievances. Section 25 provides of pupil-teacher ratio. Section 26 provides of filling up vacancies of teachers. Section 27 provides for prohibition of deployment of teachers for non educational purposes. Section 28 provides of prohibition of private tuition by teacher. 79. The Chapter V is in respect of Curriculum and completion of elementary education, and procedure is provided in Chapter VI protection of Right to children is dealt with. Section 31 provides for monitoring of child’s right to education. Section 32 provides for redressal of grievances. Section 33 provides of Constitution of National Advisory Council. Section 34 provides for Constitution of State Advisory Council. 80. Chapter VII, section 35 provides for power to the Central Government to issue directions/guidelines to the appropriate Government or as the case may be, the local authority, as it deems fit for the purposes of implementation of the provisions of the RTE Act. Section 36 provides of previous sanction for prosecution. Section 37 provides for protection of action taken in good faith. Section 38 provides for power of appropriate Government to make Rules. Section 39 provides for power of the Central Government to remove difficulties. Section 36 provides of previous sanction for prosecution. Section 37 provides for protection of action taken in good faith. Section 38 provides for power of appropriate Government to make Rules. Section 39 provides for power of the Central Government to remove difficulties. Under the said Act the Schedule is provided to Sections 19 to 25 wherein the norms and standards for a school are prescribed the said schedule reads thus:- THE SCHEDULE (See Sections 19 to 25) NORMS AND STANDARDS FOR SCHOOL S. No. Item Name and standards Number of teachers 1. Number of teachers: (a) For first class to fifth class Admitted children Up to Sixty Between sixty-one to ninety Between ninety one to One hundred and twenty Between One hundred and twenty one to two hundred Two Three Four Five Above one Hundred and fifty children Above Two hundred children Five plus one Head teacher Pupil-Teacher Ratio (Excluding Head teacher) Shall not Exceed forty (b) Fox sixth class to eighth (1) At least one teacher per Class so that Class there shall be atleast one teacher Each for- (i) Science and Mathematics (ii) Social Studies (iii) Languages (2) At least one teacher for every thirty five Children (3) Where admission of children is above one hundred - (i) A full time head teachers (ii) Part time instructors for - (A) Art Education (B) Health and Physical Education (C) Work Education 2. Building All-whether building consisting of- (i) At least one classroom for every Teacher and on office cum-store-cum Head Teacher’s room. (ii) Barrier free access (iii) Separate toilets for boys and girls. (iv) Safe and adequate drinking water facility to all children (v) a kitchen where mid-day meal is cooked in the school (vi) play ground (vii) arrangements for securing the school building by boundary wall or fencing 3. Minimum number of working (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Two hundred working days for first class to days/ instructional hours in an fifth class academic year. Two hundred and twenty working days for sixth class to eighth class. Eight hundred instructional hours per academic year for first class to fifth class. One thousand instructional hours per academic year for sixth class to eighth class 4. Minimum number of working hours per week for the teacher Forty-five teaching Including preparation hours. 5. Two hundred and twenty working days for sixth class to eighth class. Eight hundred instructional hours per academic year for first class to fifth class. One thousand instructional hours per academic year for sixth class to eighth class 4. Minimum number of working hours per week for the teacher Forty-five teaching Including preparation hours. 5. Teaching learning equipment Shall be provided to each class as required There shall be a library in each school providing 6. Library Newspaper, magazines and books on all subjects, including story-books 7. Play material, games and sports equipment Shall be provided to each class as required 81. Under the said Act, Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules 2010 are prescribed. The said Rules are prescribed by the Central Government. It is not in dispute that the RTE Act came into force w.e.f. 1.4.2010. Therefore, it is not in dispute that from the date of commencement of RTE Act, three years period has been completed, and admittedly the State Government has not formulated final policy document so as to take effective steps for implementation of the provisions of the RTE Act, Rules thereunder and also the appointment of the part Time Instructors for (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education as well as other appointments. 82. Rules of 2010 framed by the Central Government provides for appointment of school management committee. Rule 3 provides for composition and functions of the School Management Committee. Under the said Rules, various functions which are supposed to be carried out by the school management have been enlisted. Rule 4 provides for preparation of School development plan and Rule 5 under Part III of the said rules provides for Special Training to the children. Rule 5 reads thus:- “5. Special Training;-(1) The School Management committee of a school owned and managed by the appropriate Government or local authority shall identify children requiring special training and organize such training in the following manner, namely:- (a) The special training shall be based on specially designed, age appropriate learning material, approved by the academic authority specified in sub-section (1) of section 29. (b) The said training shall be provided in classes held on the premises of the school, or in classes organized in safe residential facilities. (b) The said training shall be provided in classes held on the premises of the school, or in classes organized in safe residential facilities. (c) The said training shall be provided by teachers working in the school, or by teachers specially appointed for the purpose. (d) The duration of the said training shall be for a minimum period of three months which may be extended, based on periodical assessment of learning progress, for a maximum period not exceeding two years. (2) The child shall, upon induction into the age appropriate class, after special training, continue to receive special attention by the teacher to enable him to successfully integrate with the rest of the class, academically and emotionally.” (Emphasis supplied) 83. Rule 9 provides for responsibility of the appropriate Government and local authority. Chapter V in the said Rules provides for responsibilities of schools and Teachers. Rule 15 and 16 provide of recognition to school and withdrawal of recognition to school. Part VI makes provision of Teachers. Rule 17 lays down minimum qualification, Rule 18 provides for relaxation of minimum qualification. Rule 19 provides for acquiring minimum qualification. Rule 20 provides for salary and allowances and conditions of service of teachers. Rule 21 provides for duties performed by teachers. Rule 22 provides for maintaining pupil-teacher ratio. In part VII Rule 23 provides for Academic authority. The provisions is made for establishing academic authority. Part VIII of the said Rules provides for protection of Right of Children. 84. Appendix Form I under the Rules of 2010 provides for self declaration/application for grant of recognition of school under sub-rule (1) of Rule 15. In the said form various clauses are provided wherein information is required to be filled in. Therefore, the said Act provides for certain steps which are required to be taken by the Central Government. The appropriate government in the facts of the present case, as already observed is the State Government. The Rules framed by the Central Government also provides for procedure and for appointment of teachers and qualification, procedure for such appointment etc. As already observed, admittedly, the State government has not formulated final policy. Some of the petitioners herein aggrieved by the termination of their services approached this court by way of filing writ petition No. 7359 of 2012 filed by one ArvindDattarao Tupkari and others vs. State of Maharashtra and others with other connected writ petitions. As already observed, admittedly, the State government has not formulated final policy. Some of the petitioners herein aggrieved by the termination of their services approached this court by way of filing writ petition No. 7359 of 2012 filed by one ArvindDattarao Tupkari and others vs. State of Maharashtra and others with other connected writ petitions. The Division Bench of this Court on 7.9.2012 in para 14 was constrained to observe as under:- “14. In the result, considering the facts of these cases, the material placed before us, the provisions of the RTE Act and the submissions advanced across the bar, we pass the following order:- (A) By way of interim order, we direct the Joint Director (Administration) Maharashtra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad, Mumbai to allow all the part time Instructors appointed under the communication stated above by the respective Municipal Corporations, Zilla Parishad to discharge their duties as such, under the conditions stipulated by respective appointment orders. (B) We direct that the part-time Instructors who came to be relieved/terminated/removed as part-time Instructors working under the above mentioned scheme shall be deemed to have been engaged as part-time Instructors and they shall be allowed to discharge their duties in accordance with the conditions of the appointment letters. (C) These directions shall be applicable to all the part-time Instructors appointed under the aforementioned scheme by the authorities of the Municipal Corporations and Zilla Parishads in the State of Maharashtra. (D) We direct the Joint Director (Administration) Maharashtra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad, Mumbai to intimate these authorities of the order and directions issued forthwith.” Accordingly, in para 14, this Court has granted ad-interim relief by directing the Joint Director (Administration), Prathamik Shikshan Parishad, Mumbai to inform all concerned Officer of the Zilla Parishad and Municipal Corporation in the State of Maharashtra to maintain status quo in respect of appointment made as part time instructors in the State of Maharashtra. While hearing the aforementioned writ petition on 7.9.2012 in para 8, the Division Bench of this court recorded the submissions of the learned AGP appearing for the State. Para 8 of the said order reads thus:- “8. While hearing the aforementioned writ petition on 7.9.2012 in para 8, the Division Bench of this court recorded the submissions of the learned AGP appearing for the State. Para 8 of the said order reads thus:- “8. Learned A.G.P., on instructions, submits that the State Government is preparing the final policy document in respect of the steps to be taken for recruiting the employees, staff under various categories to effectively implement the mandate of the Act of 2009 and the policy decision is to be taken by the State Government considering the letter and spirit of the Act of 2009.” 85. Upon reading para 8 of the said order dated 7.9.2012, there is no manner of doubt that the State Government diverted the attention of this Court from the subject matter involved in the petitions by giving assurance that, the State Government is preparing final policy document in respect of steps to be taken by recruiting the employees, staff under various categories to effectively implement the mandate of RTE Act and the policy decision is to be taken by the State Government considering the letter and spirit of the RTE Act. The said statement was made on 7.9.2012 and till these matters are finally heard by this Court, the State Government has not placed on record final policy document. Therefore, in our opinion, it is the failure on the part of the State Government in not formulating final policy document though assurance was given to this Court, almost two years back and when the provisions of RTE Act and Rules there under provides for formulating final policy document within three years from the date of commencing of the RTE Act. As already observed, RTE Act came into force from 1.4.2010. Three years period is completed and even thereafter one years period is over, yet the State Government has not formulated final policy document. 86. As already observed, RTE Act came into force from 1.4.2010. Three years period is completed and even thereafter one years period is over, yet the State Government has not formulated final policy document. 86. The Supreme Court while interpreting and explaining the scope of Article 21-A vis-a-vis the provisions of RTE Act, in the case of Society for Un-aided P. School of Rajasthan vs. Union of India and another, reported in AIR 2012 SC 3445 held thus:- “The expansive provisions of the 2009 Act are intended not only to guarantee the right to free and compulsory education to children, but to set up an intrinsic regime of providing right to education to all children by providing the required infrastructure and compliance of norms and standards. Secondly, unlike other fundamental rights, the right to education places a burden not only on the State but also on the parent/guardian of every child.” (Emphasis supplied) “From the scheme of Article 21-A and the 2009 Act, it is clear that the primary obligation is of the State to provide for free and compulsory education to child between the age of 6 to 14 years and, particularly to children who are likely to be prevented from pursuing and completing the elementary education due to inability to afford fees or charges. Correspondingly, every citizen has a right to establish and administer educational institution under Article 19 (1) (g) so long as the activity remain charitable. Such an activity undertaken by the private institutions supplements the primary obligation of the State. Thus, the State can regulate by law the activities of the private institutions by imposing reasonable restrictions under Article 19(6). The 2009 Act not only encompasses the aspects of right of children to free and compulsory education but to carry out the provisions of the 2009 Act, it also deals with the matters pertaining to establishment of school as also grant of recognition.” (Emphasis supplied) In the case of Avinash Mehrotra vs. Union of India and others reported in (2009) 6 SCC 398 the Supreme Court held thus:- “No matter where a family seeks to educate its children, the State must ensure that children suffer no harm in exercising their fundamental right and civil duty. States thus bear the additional burden of regulation, ensuring that schools provide safe facilities as part of a compulsory education.” (Emphasis supplied) 87. States thus bear the additional burden of regulation, ensuring that schools provide safe facilities as part of a compulsory education.” (Emphasis supplied) 87. The provisions of Article 21-A and Article 45 of the Constitution of India if read conjointly with the provisions of RTE Act and the expositions of the Supreme Court, referred to herein above, there is no slightest doubt that, the State of Maharashtra is under Constitutional and statutory obligation to implement the provisions of RTE Act. Therefore, in the light of the discussion herein above, we have to observe that, the State Government and in particular the concerned department has failed in its obligation to formulate final policy document and thereby frustrated the mandate of Article 21-A of the Constitution of India and the provisions of RTE Act and in particular Sections 19 and 23 and Scheduled thereunder and other provisions of the RTE Act as well. 88. The State of Maharashtra, once upon a time was the pioneer and leading State, in over all development and implementation of the provisions meant for welfare of the society, fails in preforming its obligation to fulfill the objects of Article 21-A and the provisions of RTE Act, cannot be countenanced, and judicial note of such failure of the State deserves to be taken. 89. As already observed, due to failure of the State Government not to formulate final policy document within three years from the date of commencement of RTE Act, in the academic year 2013-14, though budgetary provision was to be made by the Central Government and also by the State Government, as reflected from the documents placed on record, since no final policy document was prepared by the State Government, the Central Government did not release the funds to the extent of its share of 65%, and as a result, the State government did not appoint the petitioners and other candidates for the academic year 2013-14. We are constrained to observe that, it is the sheer failure of the State Government in not formulating the policy document within three years from the date of commencement of RTE Act, the Central Government did not sanction and release 65% of the funds though provision was made by the Central Government and resultantly the petitioners’ appointments might be for specified period and clock hour basis, could not be continued for the academic year 2013-14. The petitioners are not at fault on their part, and therefore, they have rightly knocked the doors of this Court by invoking writ jurisdiction for redressal of their grievance. 90. The third question which falls for consideration is:- (iii) Whether the appointment of the petitioners, was as a back door entry or those were made in pursuance to the directions of the State government by local management committee? The petitioners in their petitions have in clear words stated that, all the petitioners have been appointed by the local managing committee which was directed to make such appointments by the State government, through respondent Parishad by advertising the post and through selection process by the local management. The learned Additional Government Pleader argued that, the appointments of the petitioners are not by the competent selection committee and also the procedure is not followed in their appointments, in as much as, their appointments are illegal and not in accordance with law. In this respect it is necessary to refer to the affidavit in reply filed by the Officer of Education Department of the State Government. 91. In the affidavit in reply filed by Mr. N.M. Joshi, Joint Director, (Quality), Maharashtra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad, Mumbai, on 29.11.2013 in writ petition No. 7106 of 2013 in para 3 it is stated that the government of India sanctioned the posts of Part time Instructors for (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education from the year 2010-2011 to 2012-13 in Government Upper Primary schools only. In the said affidavit, it is further stated that for effective implementation of the said Act, Government of Maharashtra has issued guidelines vide Circular dated 18.6.2010. It is stated that the said Act came into force from 1.4.2010. It is further stated that the provisions are being implemented as per Section 22 of the RTE Act 2009. In para 10 it is stated that based on sanction of Government of India’s Project Approval Board, government of Maharashtra vide G.R. dated 7.12.2011 prescribed the pay scale as honorarium on Clock Hour Basis for Part Time Instructors. It was also prescribed that the posts of Part Time Instructors will be filled in by adopting requisite procedure. In para 10 it is stated that based on sanction of Government of India’s Project Approval Board, government of Maharashtra vide G.R. dated 7.12.2011 prescribed the pay scale as honorarium on Clock Hour Basis for Part Time Instructors. It was also prescribed that the posts of Part Time Instructors will be filled in by adopting requisite procedure. In para 11, it is stated that as per the G.R. dated 7.12.2011, 8577 posts of Part Time Instructors were sanctioned on the basis of Government of India approval and they were given appointments for three months purely on clock hour basis through school management committee in the year 2010-11. and for 10 months in the year 2011-12. It was clearly mentioned in the appointment orders of the petitioners that they were appointed purely on temporary honorarium basis and have no right to claim for continuation in the service. It is further stated in para 12 that in the year 2012-13 additional 10,068 posts were sanctioned in the light of the of number of students purely on clock hour and temporary basis and again the clear cut understanding was given to the appointees that their appointment is purely on clock hour and temporary basis. In para 13 it is stated that the school management committee have been constituted for each of the Government and Government aided primary schools as per Section 21 of the RTE Act. It is not true that the school management committee were formed only to appoint Part Time Instructors in Upper Primary Schools. The Roles and responsibilities of the school management committee are prescribed in Sections 21 and 22 of the said Act. The recruitment was to be made subject wise from local candidates by Schools Management Committee for three months. It further appears that, as stated in para 15, the Parishad vide its letter dated 7.6.2012 issued guidelines regarding salary of Teachers. In para 15 it is mentioned that the Government is going to issue G.R. regarding recruitment of Part Time Instructors. Meanwhile guidelines regarding temporary appointment of Part Time Instructors were issued in which it was clearly mentioned that Part Time Instructors should be appointed on temporary basis through School Management Committee on clock hour basis from 1.7.2012 till the Government Resolution is issued. Meanwhile guidelines regarding temporary appointment of Part Time Instructors were issued in which it was clearly mentioned that Part Time Instructors should be appointed on temporary basis through School Management Committee on clock hour basis from 1.7.2012 till the Government Resolution is issued. In para 17, it is stated that it is true that as stated by the petitioners, the appointment of part time Instructors through School management committee were on temporary and clock hour basis till government takes final decision. 92. Therefore, upon reading aforementioned paragraphs of the affidavit in reply filed by the Officer of the State Government, there is no slightest doubt that the appointment of the petitioners as part time Instructors for (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education are through the school management committee on the instructions issued by the State Government through the Parishad. Though the learned Additional Government Pleader during the course of hearing argued that they are not selected through proper selection or they are selected/appointed illegally or there are irregularities in their appointments. However, in view of the statement made in the affidavit in reply, such assertion of the Additional Government pleader during the course of argument is devoid of any merits and such argument deserves to be rejected, as it is contrary to the statement made in the affidavit in reply filed by the Officer of the State Government. When the Additional Government Pleader was confronted with a specific query that whether any instances are placed on record so as to show or suggest that, the petitioners are illegally appointed or there are irregularity in their appointments, he could not point out a single specific instance to that effect. Therefore, in our considered view, the State Government cannot take stand that, the appointment of the petitioners is by back door entry or without following proper procedure. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the petitioners have been selected and appointed for a specific period by the local management on instructions of the State Government through the respondent Parishad. 93. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the petitioners have been selected and appointed for a specific period by the local management on instructions of the State Government through the respondent Parishad. 93. The learned Additonal Government Pleader tried to canvass that, the post sanctioned are 8577 of part time instructors by issuing Government Resolution dated 7.12.2011, by the Government of Maharashtra and also additional 10068 posts were sanctioned in the light of strength of students, purely on clock hour basis in the year 2012-13 and the said posts were sanctioned for a particular year. Upon careful perusal of the contents of G.R. dated 7.12.2011 or other documents placed on record, sanctioning additional 10068 posts on clock hour and temporary basis, nowhere it is mentioned that those posts are sanctioned for a particular year. Therefore, the argument of the learned Additonal Government Pleader that, those posts were sanctioned for that particular year deserves to be rejected and accordingly the same stands rejected. 94. There is another reason why such contention of learned Additional Government Pleader deserves to be rejected, is that in order to give true effect and meaning to Article 21-A of the Constitution of India, so as to provide free and compulsory education to the children between the age group of 6 to 14, and further in order to implement the provisions of RTE Act, the State Government cannot sanction the post on temporary basis for particular academic year and such sanction of the posts has to be on permanent basis and long term measure/plan by the State in conformity with the provisions of RTE Act and schedule therein. Therefore, in the light of the discussion herein above, it has to be concluded that, the petitioners were appointed as part time Instructors for (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education etc. on clock hour basis for particular period, through local management committee as per the directions issued by the State Government through the Parishad. Therefore, we reject the argument of the Additional Government Pleader that, appointments of the petitioners were not proper or regular. We hold that, the appointment of the petitioners were by selection committee i.e. local management, as directed by the State Government through Prathamik Shikshan Parishad and not as a back door entry. Therefore, we reject the argument of the Additional Government Pleader that, appointments of the petitioners were not proper or regular. We hold that, the appointment of the petitioners were by selection committee i.e. local management, as directed by the State Government through Prathamik Shikshan Parishad and not as a back door entry. Consequently, we hold that the State Government cannot sanction the post as tried to be canvassed by the learned Additional Government Pleader, for a particular year, and it has to be on permanent basis as a long term measure. Therefore, the argument of Additonal Government Pleader that, said posts were sanctioned for a particular year, stands rejected. 95. The next and important question which falls for our consideration is:- (iv) Whether the petitioners can, as a matter of right, ask for regularization of their services? As it is evident from the pleadings and grounds taken in the petition and also the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that, the petitioners’ selection were by proper selection committee, constituted by local management and their appointments were on sanctioned posts and therefore, according to the petitioners their services deserve to be regularized. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have tendered across the bar short affidavit with averments that, the petitioners’ services deserve to be regularized contending that the Government of Maharashtra issued Government Resolutions / Orders / Notifications so as to regularize services of employees appointed on ad-hoc basis, in various departments, that too without following the process of selection prescribed under the Recruitment Rules. 96. It submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that, the policy regarding regularization, absorption and protection of temporary Government servant is adopted and followed rather selectively since 1974. Thus, the policy regarding absorption/regularization of services of daily wagers, workers, working on work-charged basis was first adopted under Kalelkar Award so as to grant protection and benefits to daily-rated workmen and employees working on work charge establishment. Thus, such of the workmen on daily wages, who have been working continuously for five years on such establishment were held to be entitled, upon completion of five years to have the posts held by them converted into posts on temporary establishment and such daily rated workmen were appointed on such converted posts. Thus, such of the workmen on daily wages, who have been working continuously for five years on such establishment were held to be entitled, upon completion of five years to have the posts held by them converted into posts on temporary establishment and such daily rated workmen were appointed on such converted posts. Upon appointment on the Converted Temporary Establishment (CTE), the workman were ultimately absorbed on permanent basis and covered under the Bombay Civil Services Rules. On completion of ten years total service either on daily wages or on converted temporary establishment, all such workmen were to be treated as Regular Temporary Establishment (RTE). 97. It is submitted that the Kalelkar Award was a major policy decision applicable to the daily rated, work-charged and converted permanent / temporary establishment workman of the Public Works and Housing Department which was subsequently extended to Irrigation and several others Departments of the State of Maharashtra. It is submitted that the Government reiterated the policy adopted by it by way of “Kalelkar Award” with retrospective effect. 98. It is submitted that the services of Muster Assistants appointed in various departments of the State of Maharashtra under Employment Guarantee Scheme on ad hoc basis were regularized. The services of the Assistant Engineers Class-II in the Maharashtra Engineering Services Group – B appointed till 16th June, 1997 have been regularized subject to passing oral qualifying examination conducted by the MPSC. It is submitted that similarly, services of 3761 employees appointed in various departments of Mantralaya, who were not selected through the procedure of Selection Board, came to be regularized by the Government vide its Resolution dated 8th March, 1999. 99. It is submitted that the Government of Maharashtra introduced scheme of appointing “Shikshan Sevaks” and “Krishi Sevaks”, which were revised from time to time. The services of all such “Krishi Sevaks appointed on ad-hoc basis were ultimately regularized. It is submitted that almost under similar circumstances the State of Maharashtra regularized the services of the Para-teachers in small helmets such as Vasti, Wadi, Pada and Tanda etc. vide Government Resolution dated 20.03.2001 issued by the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. It is submitted that the Government decided to regularize the services of 599 teachers vide resolution dated 06.05.2005. 100. vide Government Resolution dated 20.03.2001 issued by the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. It is submitted that the Government decided to regularize the services of 599 teachers vide resolution dated 06.05.2005. 100. It is submitted that the Government had introduced the scheme regarding appointment of “Gram Sevaks” and “Krishi Sevaks” on contract basis vide various resolutions. It is submitted that almost under similar circumstances the services of the Lecturers working in Government Medical and Dental colleges who were appointed de-hors the Recruitment Rules and in any case without selection by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission are regularized as a special case vide Government Resolution dated 22-01-2009. 101. It is submitted that the Government of Maharashtra in its Public Health Department regularized the services of about 1100 Medical Offices who were working on contract basis and had completed three or more than three years services as on 31-12-2006, which is evident from the Notification dated 02-02-2009 issued by the Joint Secretary to Government, Public Health Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 102. It is submitted that the State Government vide its resolution dated 27th October, 2009 declared that the government would keep 10% horizontal reservation in Class-III appointments on permanent basis in all the Government Offices within the State of Maharashtra, applicable to all the department/Semi Government so as to absorb part-time employees. The State Government further declared that the part time employees who have put in three years service as a “Anshkalin Karmachari” and who had registered their names with the office of Employment of Exchange, were eligible for such reservation. 103. It is submitted that the Government took a decision to convert 285 temporary posts of Librarians into permanent posts under the Directorate of Libraries as per Government Resolution dated 21.06.2006, vide Government Resolution dated 14th December, 2009. It is submitted that the State Government decided to regularize the services of 451 daily wages employees who have put in five years service continuously, for 240 days per year vide Government resolution dated 31.10.2013. The instances of regularization of the services of employees appointed on ad-hoc basis by the Government can be multiplied. 104. It is submitted that the Government of Maharashtra has not adopted a uniform policy regulating regularization of services. The Government of Maharashtra has been regularizing services of several employees appointed on ad-hoc basis as an when it considered convenient to do so. 105. 104. It is submitted that the Government of Maharashtra has not adopted a uniform policy regulating regularization of services. The Government of Maharashtra has been regularizing services of several employees appointed on ad-hoc basis as an when it considered convenient to do so. 105. Upon considering the affidavit in reply filed by the State authorities, as mentioned herein above, in the light of copies of appointments orders placed on record by the petitioners and the judgment of the Supreme Court and this Court, we will have to hold that no mandatory directions can be issued to the State Government to regularize the services of the petitioners by giving service benefits and permanency. Upon careful perusal of the appointment letters, which were issued to the petitioners, the petitioners were appointed for specified period on specific pay and not in regular pay scale and also in some cases on clock hour basis. Therefore, we reject the prayer of the petitioners for regularization of their services and directions to the State Government to regularize their services and grant them benefit of permanency. However, upon careful perusal of the material placed on record by the petitioners, and in particular by way of filing additional affidavit, in the similar facts and circumstances, and in similar set of facts, the State Government has absorbed, regularized and appointed the employees, though earlier they were appointed on clock hour basis or for part time, or for temporary period. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that, all the petitioners have discharged their duties sincerely, for the period stipulated in their appointment orders, for respective years, and the work experience which they have gained, during said period, has to be given due weightage and the petitioners cases are required to be considered on priority basis. Even in the case of State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi (supra) the Supreme Court in para 44 held thus:- “44. One aspect needs to be clarified. There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S. V. Narayanappa (supra), R.N. Nanjundappa (supra) and B.N. Nagarajan (supra), and referred to in paragraph 15 above, of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts might have been made and the employees have continued to work for ten years or more but without the intervention of orders of courts or of tribunals. The question of regularization of the services of such employees may have to be considered on merits in the light of the principles settled by this Court in the cases above referred to and in the light of this judgment. In that context, the Union of India, the State Governments and their instrumentalities should take steps to regularize as a one time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of courts or of tribunals and should further ensure that regular recruitments are undertaken to fill those vacant sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daily wagers are being now employed. The process must be set in motion within six months from this date. We also clarify that regularization, if any already made, but not subjudice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there should be no further by-passing of the constitutional requirement and regularizing or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme.” (Emphasis supplied). 106. Therefore, in the light of discussion herein above and in view of observations in para 44 by Supreme Court, in the case of State of Karnataka (supra) it is quite possible for the State of Maharashtra, which is considered to be welfare State, to redress the grievance of the petitioners keeping in view the services rendered by them for three years, and failure of the State Government in not appointing them for 4th year due to not formulating final policy document, and as a consequence not receiving funds from the Central Government, since the State Government failed to take measures/implement the provisions of RTE Act within three years from 1.4.2010 i.e. with effect from coming into force the RTE Act. 107. As already observed, so far the State Government has failed in its obligation/duties to implement the provisions of the RTE Act and not formulated final policy document within three years. 107. As already observed, so far the State Government has failed in its obligation/duties to implement the provisions of the RTE Act and not formulated final policy document within three years. As a Welfare State, the State Government keeping in view problems faced by the citizens like the petitioners and also keeping in view “human rights” involved in the matters, the wisdom will prevail over the State Government to take appropriate measures for redressal of grievances of the petitioners by giving considerable weightage to their experience and length of service and also by giving priority to them in the appointments, as a long time measure so as to implement the provisions of RTE Act, Rules thereunder and the Schedule prescribed. 108. The next question, in the light of prayer clause “A” in the petition arises for consideration is v. Whether it is necessary to direct the State Government to create permanent cadre of part time Instructors for (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education as specified in Section 19 r.w. Schedule of the RTE Act, r.w. Rule 20 of the Rules of 2010 thereof in all the Zilla Parishad Schools having 5th to 7th standards and minimum strength of 100 students, in the State of Maharashtra by issuing a writ of mandamus, orders, directions or any other appropriate writ, as the case may be? 109. In this respect, affidavit in reply filed by the State Government is to the effect that no cadre of part time instructors for (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education as specified under the provisions of RTE Act and Rules thereunder can be created on permanent basis. The reasons given by the State Government are two fold. Firstly, there are surplus teachers in the schools and those are required to be absorbed and secondly, the sufficient work load is not available in the (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education and therefore, there cannot be any permanent cadre of part time Instructors or (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education as specified as prayed by the petitioners. 110. 110. In this respect the petitioners have filed rejoinder to the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of respondent No.1 by one Narayan Wamanrao Joshi on 29.11.2013, and it is stated that in the said rejoinder affidavit that the stand taken by the State Government not to create permanent cadre of part time Instructors (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education is contrary to the provisions of RTE Act and Rules thereunder. It is also stated in para 9 of the said rejoinder affidavit that the post sanctioned by the State Government are on regular basis and therefore, the State Government has to create permanent cadre of part time Instructors (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education, as specified. It is also stated in para 5 that there is nothing in the Act to infer that all such part time Instructors are to be appointed on temporary basis and purely on clock hour basis. Similarly, there is nothing in the Act from which it can be inferred that all such part-time instructors are not to be given regular pay-scales. The petitioners have placed reliance on the provisions of Section 19 and Schedule therein and have stated that it is the State Government’s obligation to provide compulsory and free education to the children from the age groups 6 to 14 and therefore, the State Government is bound to fill in the sanctioned posts on permanent basis and not on temporary and on clock hour basis, as a permanent measure. 111. Upon perusal of the provision of RTE Act and Schedule therein, this Court is of the opinion that, the State Government is under obligation to implement the provisions of RTE Act, as it is evident from the discussion in foregoing paragraphs that, the State Government has to take permanent measures and cannot fill in the posts on temporary and on clock hour basis forever. The State Government has to create a structure on permanent basis and take measures and also create cadre so as to effectively implement the provisions of RTE Act, Rules there under and schedule in its letter and spirit. The State Government has to create a structure on permanent basis and take measures and also create cadre so as to effectively implement the provisions of RTE Act, Rules there under and schedule in its letter and spirit. The approach of the State Government, as reflected in the affidavit in reply filed by a responsible Officer, to appoint the part time Instructors in (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education permanently on temporary basis and clock hour basis, on the ground that, the work load is not available and there are surplus teachers to be absorbed would run contrary to the constitutional and statutory obligation to implement the provisions of Article 21-A and the provisions of RTE Act. The State Government will have to take permanent measures, and temporary measures or short time plans cannot be in conformity with the provisions of Article 21-A and the RTE Act. When the Central Government is releasing 65% funds per year and the State Government has to contribute only 35% funds, the State Government cannot proceed with a sole intention to absorb surplus teachers in schools and frustrate the provisions of the RTE Act, wherein the requisite qualification is prescribed in the appointment of part time Instructors (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education. In the facts of the present cases, it is contended by the counsel appearing for the petitioners that all petitioners fulfill requisite qualifications required for appointment for the post of physical Instructor. This statement of the petitioners have not been disputed by the authorities of State Government, however, it is for the respondent authorities to find out requisite qualifications of the petitioners on individual basis at the time of taking final decision about their further appointments. Therefore, we are of the opinion that, the State Government has to formulate its policy on permanent basis as a long time measure. Once the candidates are appointed on permanent basis by creating permanent cadre, and in case work load is not available, those candidates at the time of giving appointment can be told that, they have to go to other schools so as to complete requisite work load. In this respect, counsel for the petitioners has placed on record the policy formulated by the Government of Kerala, wherein the appointments are made on consolidated pay of Rs.14,000/- and teachers bank is created. In this respect, counsel for the petitioners has placed on record the policy formulated by the Government of Kerala, wherein the appointments are made on consolidated pay of Rs.14,000/- and teachers bank is created. We are not elaborating on the said aspect and it is for the State government to consider the issue of taking permanent measures. Therefore, we leave the said issue for the decision of the State Government, in the light of the discussion made herein above, we conclude the same. 112. So far as the prayer clause “B” in the petition is concerned, the petitioners have sought directions to appoint them as part time Instructors for the academic year 2013-14. Though inspite of assurance given to this Court on earlier dates of hearing, the State Government did not fulfill its assurance to make appointment for the year 2013-14. By this time, the said academic year has come to end and therefore, we cannot issue any mandatory directions for appointment of the petitioners for the academic year 2013-14. However, we are constrained to make observations that, it is the State government’s failure not to formulate permanent policy document within three years from 1.4.2010 i.e. the date on which RTE Act came into force, and therefore, the funds by the Central Government, could not be released to the State Government for the academic year 2013-14. Therefore, we hold that, it is complete failure of the State Government, not to implement the provisions of RTE Act in its letter and spirit, within three years, as contemplated under said Act, and therefore, the State Government, keeping in view the mental agony caused to the petitioners in not continuing them for the academic year 2013-14, while making further appointments, should give due weightage and priority to the petitioners. 113. The next question which arises for consideration is: (vi) Whether the directions deserve to be issued to the respondents for prescribed pay scale to the part time Instructors (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education commensurate to their qualification, which shall not be less than half of the pay scales prescribed for full time teachers in the subjects of science and mathematics, social studies, languages and all other benefits such as medical facilities, pension, gratuity, provident fund etc.? 114. 114. Since the State Government has not formulated final policy document, we are of the opinion that, the prayer clause “C” of the petitioners can be considered favourably by the State Government keeping in view the provisions of Article 21-A of the Constitution and the provisions of the RTE Act to create permanent infrastructure/machinery for implementation and execution of the said provisions. 115. In the light of discussion herein before, we hope and expect that, while formulating final policy document, the State Government will consider the said aspect of prescribing pay scales to the part time Instructors (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education commensurate to their qualifications, which is not less than half of the pay scales prescribed for full time teachers. 116. In the light of the discussion in forgoing paragraphs, we are of the opinion that, the State Government and in particular concerned department, has not performed its obligation as envisaged and contemplated under the provisions of RTE Act, in as much as the State Government has not formulated final policy document within three years from the date of commencement of RTE Act i.e. 1.4.2010. In our opinion, the State government did not make serious efforts and attempts so as to implement the provisions of the RTE Act, within three years from 1.4.2010, and has not paid serious attention as to why Article 21-A has been incorporated in chapter III i.e. fundamental rights, in the Constitution of India, and also the Supreme Court’s Judgments referred to above, wherein the scope of Article 21-A vis-a-vis the provisions of RTE Act 2009 has been explained by the Supreme Court wherein the obligation of the Government has been emphasized. By this time, the State Government should have taken permanent measures by creating permanent structure so as to implement the provisions of RTE Act, Rules and Schedule thereunder. 117. We are constrained to observe that, the petitioners are approaching this court from the year 2012, and almost on every date of hearing, learned AGP appearing for the State Government assured this court that, the Government is formulating final policy documents soon and created some hindrance in passing appropriate orders. This Court, time and again was informed that, State is formulating final policy document. Such statements were made by the learned AGP appearing for the State from August 2012 onwards on almost every dates of hearing. This Court, time and again was informed that, State is formulating final policy document. Such statements were made by the learned AGP appearing for the State from August 2012 onwards on almost every dates of hearing. However, no final policy document has been prepared. 118. In the light of elaborate/detailed discussion in foregoing paragraphs, this Court has reached to following final conclusions:- (i) It is the failure of the State Government and in particular concerned Education Department, not to formulate final policy document within three years from 1.4.2010 i.e. the date when the RTE Act 2009 came into force. (ii) Since the State Government did not formulate final policy document within three years, as contemplated under RTE Act, and in particular keeping in view provisions of Sections 19 and 23 thereof, funds were not released for the academic year 2013-14 by the Central Government. Therefore, the petitioners have to file hundreds of petitions for redressal of their grievances. No slightest fault can be attributed to the petitioners. (iii) The State Government while taking final policy decision in respect of appointments is bound to consider the length of services rendered by the respective petitioners working on the post of Instructors in (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education, mental agony faced by them in not appointing them for the academic year 2013-14 because of failure of State Government in not performing its obligation. The State Government while making fresh appointments is bound to give due weightage to the experience gained by the petitioners and their requisite qualifications and mental agony faced by them by not continuing them for the academic year 2013-14, for the failure of the State Government in not formulating permanent policy document. (iv) The State Government keeping in view the provisions of Article 21-A of the Constitution of India and the provisions of RTE Act, Rules thereunder and the Schedule prescribed, will have to take decision to create permanent infrastructure and also appointments on permanent basis as a long time measures so as to perform its Constitutional and statutory obligations under the provisions of Constitution of India and RTE Act. (v) The State Government can certainly keep in view and consider to create permanent cadre of part time Instructors in (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education as specified in Section 9 of RTE Act and Rule 20 of Rules 2010, in all Zilla Parishad Schools having 5th to 7th standards and minimum strength of 100 students in the State of Maharashtra. Since the State Government has not formulated final policy document, we leave it to the State Government to perform its obligation in view of the provisions of RTE Act. (vi) As already observed, it would be open for the State Government while appointing the candidates on the posts of part time Instructors in (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education, or on any other post under RTE Act, the State Government has to inform them that due to inadequate work load in particular schools, they will have to attend other school so as to complete the work hours/work load. The State Government can very well keep in view the policy formulated by the State of Karala or any other welfare State, as a guiding factor. (vii) The posts sanctioned by the State Government, as reflected in affidavit in reply filed by the State authorities and in the light of the Government Resolution placed on record cannot be considered for the particular academic year. Therefore, the State has to make appointments on these sanctioned posts keeping in view long term plan. 119. In the light of discussion herein before, and the conclusion reached, we direct the State Government to take immediate steps/decision, as expeditiously as possible, however well in advance before commencement of next academic year 2014-15, in all respects, in the light of para 118 of this Judgment, keeping in view the provisions of the RTE Act, Rules and Schedule thereunder. 120. All the petitions stand disposed of. No order as to costs. Rule is made absolute accordingly. 121. In view of disposal of aforesaid all writ petitions, the pending civil applications, if any, in all these petitions, stand disposed of.