JUDGMENT 1. - With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, all the petitions are disposed of by this common order at the admission stage. The common cause of action giving rise to these petitions, is on account of the press notes dated 31/12/2014 and 17/2/2015 given by the respondents, whereby it has been mentioned interalia that the candidates having 60% or more marks in RTET (36% marks for the candidates belonging to SC category in TSP area) will be called for the verification of the documents for the posts of Teacher Gr.III (Level I and II). The petitioners therefore have sought quashing of the said press notes and directions against the respondents to call the petitioners for verification of documents and also thereafter to give them appointments on their respective posts in various Zila Parishads. 2. The brief facts are that the petitioners had applied for the post of Teacher Gr.III, Level I and II (subject wise) in various Zila Parishads pursuant to the advertisement dated 11/8/2013 issued by the respondents. The minimum qualification required for the said posts was laid down in condition No. 7 of the said advertisement, according to which apart from the education qualification, the candidates were required to possess the RTET Certificate. The respondents thereafter had conducted the written examination for the said posts of Teacher Gr.III and had declared the result on 31/12/2014. The respondents also issued the cut off marks for the respective categories for the respective Zila Parishads. According to the petitioners, though they had possessed less than 60% marks in RTET examination, their total number of marks calculated as per the condition No. 15 of the advertisement in question were more than the cut off marks fixed by the respondents for the said posts, and therefore they were eligible to be called for the verification of the documents and also for the appointments. 3. 3. At this juncture, it is relevant to mention that the National Councils for Teachers Education (NCTE), designated nodal agency to prescribe the minimum qualifications of eligibility for appointment as Teacher for Class I to VIII in all schools including those administered by the State Government, Local Bodies as well as Government Aided and Non-aided, had issued the notification dated 23/8/2010 published on 25/8/2010 in the gazette of India invoking its powers under Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, laying down minimum qualifications for the appointment as Teacher. It was laid down therein interalia that it would be compulsory for a person to pass the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) to be conducted by the appropriate Government in accordance with the guidelines framed by the NCTE for the purpose. The NCTE thereafter had forwarded the guidelines for conducting the TET to all Secretaries/Commissioners of Education of State Governments/UTs vide its letter dated 11/2/2011. It appears that while prescribing those minimum passing percentage for TET in the said guidelines, a liberty in terms of Clause 9(a) of the said guidelines was accorded to the school managements (Government Local Bodies, Government Aided and un-aided) to grant concession to persons belonging to SC/ST/OBC/differently able persons etc. in accordance with their extant reservation policy. Clause 9(b) provided for waftage should be given to TET Course in the recruitment process. It further appears that in the purported response to clause 9(a) of the said guidelines dated 11/2/2011, the State Government issued a letter dated 23/3/2011 to grant relaxation to the candidates belonging to various reserved categories from 10% to 20%. The NCTE thereafter vide notification dated 29/7/2011 amended its earlier notification dated 23/8/2010 modifying the minimum qualifications for the recruitment to the post of Teacher at both levels I and II. In the said notification under the caption reservation policy, it was prescribed that relaxation upto 5% in qualifying marks to the candidates belonging to reserved category such as SC/ST/OBC/PH would be extended. In the said notification under the caption reservation policy, it was prescribed that relaxation upto 5% in qualifying marks to the candidates belonging to reserved category such as SC/ST/OBC/PH would be extended. The result of RTET 2011 having been declared granting relaxation to the reserved category candidates as per the letter dated 23/3/2011 issued by the State Government and not as per the subsequent notification dated 29/7/2011 issued by the NCTE, the aggrieved candidates had filed various petitions being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13488 of 2012 and others (Vikas Kumar Agarwal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors). 4. One of the issues formulated by the learned Single Judge in the said petitions was as to whether a candidate belonging to the reserved category was eligible for the appointment to the post of Teacher Gr.III, if he was not possessing 60% marks in RTET as per the qualification prescribed by the National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE). In the said petition, the learned Single Judge interpreting the various notifications and guidelines issued by the NCTE interalia set aside the order of the State Government dated 23/3/2011 providing relaxation of marks from 10% to 20% to the reserved category in TET examination and held that the benefit of relaxation to the extent of 5% only in the qualifying marks of RTET could be granted, vide the judgment dated 6/10/2012. Being aggrieved by the said judgment passed by the learned Single Judge, various appeals came to be filed by the State of Rajasthan, and other candidates, being D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 1484 of 2012 and others. The Division Bench modified the decision of the learned Single Judge by passing the following order:- "In the wake of the determinations made here in above, the appeals fail and are dismissed. To reiterate, the results of the RTET 2011 are set aside to the extent of participation of the reserved category candidates benefited by the relaxation granted by the State Government in excess of its extant reservation policy. The results of RTET 2011 has, therefore, to be re-cast. The participation of the reserved category candidates in the final recruitment test, who would thus have to be declared unsuccessful in the RTET 2011, has also to be declared illegal. Consequently, the eventual final results in the selection process have to be prepared afresh and declared accordingly. The results of RTET 2011 has, therefore, to be re-cast. The participation of the reserved category candidates in the final recruitment test, who would thus have to be declared unsuccessful in the RTET 2011, has also to be declared illegal. Consequently, the eventual final results in the selection process have to be prepared afresh and declared accordingly. In undertaking this exercise to prepare the final results, the decision recorded herein on the aspect of migration of reserved category candidates into the quota of general category candidates would also be complied with." 5. The Division Bench while disposing of the afore stated appeals had held after considering the notification dated 23/8/2010 and 29/7/2011 issued by the NCTE, that the concession of 5% in the qualifying marks pertained to the percentage of marks in the qualifying examination of Senior Secondary/Graduation etc. and not to the percentage of pass marks in TET. It was categorically held therein that the notification dated 29/7/2011 accorded concession of 5% only to the minimum percentage of marks in the prescribed qualifying examination i.e. Senior Secondary, Graduation etc. and that this relaxation was neither intended by it nor was permissible to be co-related with the percentage of pass marks in the TET. It was also held that the concessions granted by the letter dated 23/3/2011 were not in conformity with the extant reservation policy in force and therefore the participation of the reserved category candidates in the recruitment for the post of Teacher Gr.III was required to be declared illegal. 6. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of the Division Bench, the petitioners of the said petitions i.e. Vikas Sankhala and Ors have preferred Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) being No. 23178-23182/2013 before the Apex Court, and the Apex Court vide the order dated 12/11/2013 directed the parties to maintain the status quo as it existed on the date of order. It appears that the State of Rajasthan has also preferred the SLP being No. 23508-23513/2013 against the order passed by the Division Bench. 7. In view of the above, the respondents in the advertisement dated 4/9/2013 in question, have specifically mentioned in condition No. 8 that the selection of the candidates shall be subject to the final decision of the Apex Court in SLP No. 23508-23513/2013. 7. In view of the above, the respondents in the advertisement dated 4/9/2013 in question, have specifically mentioned in condition No. 8 that the selection of the candidates shall be subject to the final decision of the Apex Court in SLP No. 23508-23513/2013. The respondents therefore have issued the press notes on 31/12/2014 and on 17/2/2015, calling only those candidates, who had obtained 60% or more in RTET examination (36% by the SC candidates in TSP Area) for verification of the documents. The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners, who have got less than 60% marks in RTET. 8. In all the petitions, the learned Additional Advocate General Mr. S.K. Gupta has made his submissions and relied upon the reply filed in the petition being No. 610 of 2015. He has stated that the said reply be treated as the reply in all the petitions. 9. The relevant part of the said reply, which is not disputed by the learned counsels for the petitioners, is reproduced, as under:- "....M. That from the above it may be most respectfully submitted that the fact situation led to creation of three categories of candidates, which are named "X,", "Y" and "Z" for the sake of convenience, as under:- Category "X": The candidates who secured 60% marks or above marks in TET examination (2011 or 2012) Category "Y": The candidates who secured 55% marks or above but less than 60% marks in TET examination (2011 or 2012) Category "Z": The candidates who were treated pass in TET examination (2011 or 2012) on the basis of order dated 23.3.2011 issued by the State Government although having not secured even 55% marks (secured less than 55% marks). N. That the legal position by far, depending upon ultimate outcome of the S.L.P. pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, emerges thus:- (i) The candidates belonging to the category "X" having secured 60% marks or above marks i.e. minimum prescribed pass marks in accordance with the guidelines of NCTE dated 11.2.2011 have been held, undisputedly, to be eligible for Direct Recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade III examination. (ii) The candidates belonging to the category "Y" were held to be eligible for Direct Recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade III examination under the order dated 6.10.2012 of the Hon'ble Single Bench by interpreting the NCTE notification dated 29.7.2011 applicable to the minimum qualifying marks of 60% marks in TET examination also besides academic qualification like B.A., B.Ed. Etc.(double relaxations). (iii) The candidates belonging to the category "Y" have not been held to be eligible for Direct Recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade III by the Hon'ble Division Bench vide order dated 2.7.2013 interpreting the NCTE notification dated 29.7.2011 to be of limited application only to the qualifying examination i.e. Senior Secondary, Graduation etc. and not minimum percentage of pass marks in the TET examination. Thus, according to the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench the candidates belonging to the "Y" category were not eligible for Direct Recruitment to the post of Teacher Gr.III as they have not obtained 60% marks or more marks in TET examination. (iv) The candidates belonging to "Z" category i.e. those who secured less than 55% marks but declared pass on the basis of the special relaxation given by the State Government vide administrative order dated 23.3.2011 were held to be ineligible for direct recruitment, by the learned Single Bench and the Hon'ble Division Bench both. O. That faced with above the factual and legal situation the candidates who had secured more than 60% marks in TET were, undisputedly, clearly eligible for their Direct Recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade III, of course subject to their placement in the merit list. Therefore, the State Government thought it appropriate after declaration of the result of Direct Recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade III Examination, 2013 on 31.12.2014 to call upon only the candidates having secured more than 60% marks in TET to come for their documents verification so that at least their selection process may proceed further. Therefore, the State Government thought it appropriate after declaration of the result of Direct Recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade III Examination, 2013 on 31.12.2014 to call upon only the candidates having secured more than 60% marks in TET to come for their documents verification so that at least their selection process may proceed further. However, a care was taken while preparing the merit list and giving appointment, if any, in respective Zila Parishads that in case the Hon'ble Supreme Court decide the S.L.P. by holding that besides candidates belonging to the category of "X", the candidates belonging to the category of "Y" or "Z" or both are considered to have passed the TET examination and accordingly are held to be eligible for Direct Recruitment to the post of Teacher Grade III, they are accordingly accommodated in the select list as per the their merit and the law of migration". 10. The learned counsels for the petitioners have not disputed the above stated facts mentioned in the reply filed by the respondents. They have also not disputed that as per the decision of the Division Bench which is under challenge before the Supreme Court, the petitioners are not eligible to be considered for the posts of Teacher Gr.III (Level I and II), they having possessed less than 60% marks in RTET. In the opinion of the Court, the respondents therefore were justified in issuing the press notes calling only those candidates who had secured 60% or more marks in RTET, for verification of the documents. 11. It is pertinent to note that the respondents have prepared the merit lists in question for the appointment on the post of Teacher Gr.III(Level I and II) for various subjects, subject to the final outcome of the SLP, which is pending before the Apex Court, and accordingly have also reserved the posts for the candidates falling in above stated category 'Y' and 'Z', at the relevant place in the merit list, securing their rights, if the decision of the Apex Court ultimately is found to be beneficial to them. 12. 12. In view of the above, it is directed that the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed further with the selection and appointment of those meritorious candidates, who have secured 60% or more marks in RTET, which appointments will be subject to the final outcome of the decision of the Apex Court in SLP No. 23178-23182/2013. It is clarified that if the candidates belonging to the 'Y' and 'Z' categories stated here in above are found eligible as per the decision of the Apex Court in SLP referred above, they shall be given notional benefits including the benefit of seniority, but not the monetary benefits. 13. With the above stated directions, all the petitions stand disposed of. By this order, the stay applications and other pending application, if any also stand disposed of. A copy of this order be placed in each connected files.Petition Disposed of. *******