Judgment A.B. Chaudhari, J. 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that caste claim of the petitioner is pending for validation with the Scrutiny Committee. He further submits that he has been working with the institution since 27-7-2012 but is unable to receive salary for want of validity certificate. He further submits that this Court has already directed the Committee to decide caste claim by judgment and order dated 3-4-2014. He further submits that he is working and is entitled to the earned wages from the management as well as Government. But he is not being paid since the approval was rejected by respondent No. 2-Education Officer for want of caste validity certificate. Per contra, learned A.G.P. opposed the petition and argued that the appointment being subject to validity certificate, no salary can be paid. 2. Upon hearing learned counsel for the rival parties, we find that the impugned order issued by the Education Officer shows that the only reason for rejection of approval to the petitioner is non-submission of Caste Validity Certificate from the Scrutiny Committee. The school being a grant-in-aid school, the petitioner is not being paid salary due to rejection. Admittedly, the claim of petitioner is pending before the Caste Scrutiny Committee and he has been working since the date of his appointment. The Government itself allowed making of appointments subject to caste validity certificate. It is beyond his control to obtain Caste Validity Certificate from the Committee. At any rate, this Court issued directions on 3-4-2014 to the Committee to decide his caste claim. What, however, we find is that the State is making violation of human rights. The history of exploitation of labour is as old as the history of civilization itself. After the advent of the Constitution of India, the State is under an obligation to improve the lot of the workforce. The preamble to the Constitution is the lodestar. While the State always expects the industrial houses and the multinational companies to adopt measures to pay decent wages and life to its employees, it would not be too much to ask the State to practise what it preaches. According to us, the State cannot be so insensitive to the plight of its citizens like the petitioner who has been rendering services since 27-7-2012 under a valid appointment order. According to us, the State cannot be so insensitive to the plight of its citizens like the petitioner who has been rendering services since 27-7-2012 under a valid appointment order. Not granting even a provisional approval in order to allow the petitioner to have at least the earned wages would certainly be in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In view of above discussion, we find that since the petitioner is actually working, he must get his salary though till the time his caste claim is validated/invalidated. The petitioner cannot be left high and dry though he has been working. We, therefore, pass the following order. ORDER (i) Writ Petition No. 2424/2014 is partly allowed. (ii) Education Officer (secondary), Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal is directed to grant provisional approval to the appointment of the petitioner upon obtaining necessary undertaking from him within a period of four weeks from today and release his salary for the work done within further four weeks. Rule made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.