JUDGMENT : 1. Considering the nature of issue raised and contentions raised being common in these matters, the same are taken up for joint hearing and disposal. 2. These petitions essentially are in connection with the appointment of Vidhya Sahayak pursuant to a public advertisement dated 22.01.2017 particularly for recruitment of Vidhya Sahayak teachers for language subjects in Urdu medium schools. 3. Apparently, the issue was first agitated in petition being Special Civil Application No.1918 of 2017 which came to be disposed by an order dated 02.02.2017 and the operative part of the order is placed at Annexure-B. At this stage, the petition was filed as the applications of those petitioners were not being accepted by online for 19 vacancies in the subject of “language” and accordingly, the directions were issued to accept the applications in physical form. It also appears that on 10.02.2017 on the website of the Department it was declared that the applications thus accepted by pursuant to the directions of this Court, on verification it was found that the applicants were lacking in prescribed qualification and could not be included in the merit list as they are not possessing bachelor degrees in the subject “language” (Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanskrit) and therefore, Misc. Civil Application No.424 of 2017 was filed in Special Civil Application No.1918 of 2017 which came to be disposed of as withdrawn to file afresh petition and accordingly, the present petitions appeared to have been filed, wherein elaborate prayers are made challenging the decision of holding the petitioners to be ineligible for recruitment of Vidhya Sahayak in Urdu Medium for the subject “language” (Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanstkrit). The petitioners also prayed for quashing and setting aside the Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011 which prescribes the qualification criteria for the post of Vidhya Sahayak to the extent that the same does not provide for qualification of B.A. with Urdu alongwith qualification of B.A. in English, Gujarati, Hindi and Sankstrit. The petitioners also have prayed in alternative to provide for including the subject of Urdu language alongwith other languages namely English, Gujarati, Hindi and Sankstri, where the educational qualification criteria was prescribed as B.A. in respective language and similarly, to prescribe qualification criteria of B.A. with Urdu for appointment as Vidhya Sahayak in Urdu Medium school. 4. The petitioners also have prayed in alternative to provide for including the subject of Urdu language alongwith other languages namely English, Gujarati, Hindi and Sankstri, where the educational qualification criteria was prescribed as B.A. in respective language and similarly, to prescribe qualification criteria of B.A. with Urdu for appointment as Vidhya Sahayak in Urdu Medium school. 4. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing and setting aside the Government Resolution dated 28.04.2016 to the extent that it holds the candidates who have not studied Urdu medium at school level or college level as eligible candidates only on the basis of having appeared in board examination of standard 12th with one of Urdu as a subject and thereby declared that for appointment as Vidhya Sahayak in Urdu Medium school, a candidate must compulsorily have studied in Urdu Medium from standard 1st to standard 12th. 5. Special Civil Application No.9743 of 2018 is also for the similar prayers, whereas Special Civil Application No.6577 of 2017 is filed with a prayer to quash and set aside the Resolution dated 28.04.2016 to the extent that it holds those candidates who have not studied in Urdu Medium School, but have studied Urdu as subject language in standard 12th also by appearing as an external subject as eligible for the appointment of Vidhya Sahayak in Urdu Medium school. The ancillary prayer is also made seeking direction to convert the seats which have remained vacant in the S.T. Category into an open category in order to accommodate candidate of SEBC Category. 5.1. Despite all these prayers, the main focus of the arguments of non considering the petitioners’ candidature and the petitioners as eligible candidates as Vidhya Sahayak to teach the subjects of English, Hindi, Gujarati and Sanskrit as they are not having a degree certificate in the aforesaid subjects, but are having a degree certificate in the subject of Urdu and therefore, those candidates having B.A. degree in subject of Urdu are more competent teachers to teach any subject in the school which has Urdu as a medium of teaching. 6. Learned Advocate Mr.K.B.Poojara appearing for the petitioners in Special Civil Application Nos.4927 of 2017 and 9743 of 2018 and learned advocate Mr.A.J.Yagnik appearing for the petitioners in Special Civil Application No.6577 of 2017 have jointly submitted as under. 6.1. 6. Learned Advocate Mr.K.B.Poojara appearing for the petitioners in Special Civil Application Nos.4927 of 2017 and 9743 of 2018 and learned advocate Mr.A.J.Yagnik appearing for the petitioners in Special Civil Application No.6577 of 2017 have jointly submitted as under. 6.1. It is submitted that the action on the part of the respondent authorities to deny the appointment to the petitioners on the ground of not possessing bachelor degree in the subject “language” (Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanstkrit), is not a valid ground and does not appeal to the logic as in a Urdu medium school, the medium of institutions would be Urdu and therefore, holding the petitioners who are having degree in Urdu as ineligible clearly makes out a case of non-application of mind and arbitrariness. It is submitted that on account of the above submission, the Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011 which specifies the subject requirement for “language” teacher, but does not specify the Urdu language as a subject “language” and therefore, to that extent Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011 is required to be read down. In support of such argument, it is submitted that the State Government specifically passed a Government Resolution dated 26.04.2012, accepting the present situation that there are schools imparting education in mediums other than Gujarati namely English, Hindi, Marathi, Urdu, Sindhi and Telugu and have accepted the requirement of teachers to be able to communicate in the respective language has provided for requirement of TET for the teachers for the schools of mediums other than Gujarati. 6.2. Learned advocate has submitted that for the candidate of medium other than Gujarati Medium, it is sufficient even if he has Urdu as one of the subjects in Std. 11 and/or Std. 12, meaning thereby that if a candidate has taken his entire education at primary, secondary and higher secondary level in any other medium and he has passed B.A. and B.Ed. examinations in other medium and thereafter if he appears in only one paper of Urdu Language as an external student at HSC Examination of the Board, even then he would become eligible to teach the students of Urdu Medium. On the other hand, the petitioners who have taken their entire education at school level and college level in Urdu Medium are held ineligible by the respondents. This is therefore a clear case of non application of mind and gross arbitrariness. 6.3. On the other hand, the petitioners who have taken their entire education at school level and college level in Urdu Medium are held ineligible by the respondents. This is therefore a clear case of non application of mind and gross arbitrariness. 6.3. The Government Resolution dated 28.04.2016 is therefore liable to be quashed as grossly arbitrary and suffering from vice of non application of mind inasmuch as the candidate who has not done his entire studies in the Urdu Medium and has passed only one paper of Urdu Language subject as only one of the subjects in Std. 12 as an external student can never be said to be equipped to teach the students of primary education in the Urdu Medium, inasmuch as passing of one paper of Urdu Language is possible even with superficial knowledge of that Language, whereas teaching the students of Urdu Medium through Urdu Language requires intensive knowledge of Urdu Language and fluency in speaking the Urdu language. it is submitted in Urdu Medium schools the papers of all the subjects are in Urdu Language and even other languages such as English and Hindi are also taught through Urdu Language and therefore, in the examination papers of English and Hindi languages also the instructions are given in Urdu language. 6.4. It is also submitted that paragraph-15 of the Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011 clearly provides that the candidate must have passed the TET Examination of the concerned medium in which he is to be appointed as teacher, and therefore, the candidates for appointment as vidya-sahayak/teacher in Urdu Medium must have passed the TET Examination also in Urdu Medium. However, all those candidates who have Urdu Language as only one of the papers and subjects at HSC Examination as external students and who have applied for the post of Language Teachers in Urdu Medium in response to the present advertisement and who are considered eligible by the respondents have not passed the TET Examination in Urdu Medium. This is a patent illegality. 6.5. In connection with Special Civil Application No.6577 of 2017, it is submitted that the petitioners have applied pursuant to the same advertisement issued by the respondent, for the post of Social Science teacher In the Urdu Medium School. This is a patent illegality. 6.5. In connection with Special Civil Application No.6577 of 2017, it is submitted that the petitioners have applied pursuant to the same advertisement issued by the respondent, for the post of Social Science teacher In the Urdu Medium School. It is further stated that all petitioner have completed their primary education i.e. std 1 to 7 as it was earlier in Urdu Medium and have studied all the subjects where medium of instruction was Urdu. One Mr. Faqueer Firoz Shah Zaheer have studied In Urdu Medium School from std 1 to 10. All the petitioners have thereafter successfully completed B.Ed and also appeared in HTAT exams and cleared the same successfully. That, final merit list was prepared by the respondent considering the application they have received from the successful candidate. In the same merit list present petitioners found their rank much below on account of accommodation of the candidates who have studied Urdu as a subject only for the purpose of appearing in an exam of std 12" that is also externally. it is therefore argued that How can a person become eligible for the appointment of the teacher in Urdu medium school for the subject of Social Science who has never studied Social Science in Urdu. In addition to that it is stated that few candidates who have been selected for the post of Social Science teacher have appeared in 12th std exam after clearing their graduation. 6.6. Against the Resolution dated 26.04.2012, amended by the a Resolution dated 28.04.2016, it is submitted that vide resolution dated 26.04.2012 form rules for fixing eligibility for the teacher who want to get appointed in particular medium of school. It has been acknowledged in the same resolution that apart from Gujarati medium school the state of Gujarat also has sizable number of schools in other medium like Hindi, Urdu, Tamil etc. Hence, education department has form rules that require to be followed in order to select candidate as a teacher in particular medium. It has also been accepted that the Teacher Eligibility Test is being conducted in only 3 languages i.e. Hindi, Gujarati and English. Therefore, any candidate desire to be appointed as a teacher in a school in which medium of instruction is other than Gujarati, Hindi and English, has to fulfill the criteria as prescribed at condition No.2 of the resolution. It has also been accepted that the Teacher Eligibility Test is being conducted in only 3 languages i.e. Hindi, Gujarati and English. Therefore, any candidate desire to be appointed as a teacher in a school in which medium of instruction is other than Gujarati, Hindi and English, has to fulfill the criteria as prescribed at condition No.2 of the resolution. As per same condition, condition (A) indicates that a desirous candidate has to complete board examination conducted by Gujarat Board in any one language and (B) a candidate has to study upto 10 std in the respective medium in which he/she so desire to be selected as a teacher or/and he/she has to pass 11" and 12" with that particular subject. However, with the new amendment Education Department has created classification within the class by replacing old condition. As per new condition, a candidate has to study upto 10 std in a particular medium school in which he intend to become teacher and/or he has to study that particular subject in std 11th or/and std 12th. This creating further classification is not only irrational and arbitrary but also detrimental to the students as well. To cite an example, a person who has never studied Urdu in his entire educational career, now with effect of impugned resolution, only by clearing Urdu exam of 12th board externally becomes eligible to teach subject of Social Science to the student of std 6-8 in Urdu Medium where the medium of instruction will also be Urdu. It is submitted that it is completely irrational and illogical to arrive at a conclusion that a person who has only studied Urdu as a subject with purpose to appear in 12th board examination that is also extremely without formally getting himself enrolled in a school, will be competent to teach theoretical and lengthy subject like social Science to the student of standard 6-8. 7. As against this, in a joint reply filed by the state Government to all the petitions, it is submitted that the basic challenge in the petitions is to the policy of the State Government fixing the suitable criteria for appointment of Vidhya Sahayak and merely for the benefit or to suit the requirement of the petitioners who are few in numbers, the details of the State Government cannot be changed. It is submitted that though on the face of it the petitioners may have termed the Government Resolution of 27.04.2011 as well as 28.04.2016 as ill-logical and without application of mind, but the basic purpose behind such challenge is to secure a job of Vidhya Sahayak for the petitioners. 7.1. It is submitted that the Government Resolutions which the petitioners seek to challenge have been passed after due deliberations by the Government and policy framers which included the experts in the field and therefore, it cannot be said that merely because the petitioners are treated ineligible as per the requirement, the resolutions are bad in law. It is submitted that majority of the petitioners have graduated with specialization in Urdu language with optional subject and therefore, the petitioners have not even submitted their mark-sheets as required. Therefore, it cannot be said presumed that the petitioners are competent to impart education in the subjects of Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanskrit languages for which they have not other qualifications. It is submitted that the final merit list for the Urdu medium, upper primary school is declared on 07.03.2017 and merit has been operated subject to the final outcome of the petitions. It is also submitted that as per Section 25 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 provides for the ratio of pupilteacher and Section 29 of the Act provides for Curriculum and Evaluation Procedure. Accordingly, Curriculum and Evaluation Procedure for elementary education shall be laid down by an academic authority to be specified by the Government Notification and the State Government accordingly appointed GCERT for this purpose. Accordingly, the Director of GCERT has communicated a letter dated 11.07.2012 to all the authorities which requires every week the classes of the subjects like Gujarati language, Hindi language, English language, Sanskrit language, Mathematics, science and physical education/Arts have been specified and accordingly, the teachers are required to be recruited for four languages which alone is the subject matter of these petitions. It is therefore, submitted that in the school in which medium of instruction is different the same language of instruction is to be taught as an additional subject of language. In view of this, the State Government has made an additional provision vide Government Resolution dated 26.04.2012 with regards to the recruitment of language teacher for other medium schools. It is therefore, submitted that in the school in which medium of instruction is different the same language of instruction is to be taught as an additional subject of language. In view of this, the State Government has made an additional provision vide Government Resolution dated 26.04.2012 with regards to the recruitment of language teacher for other medium schools. It is submitted that in Urdu Medium School or Marthi Medium School may be teaching Urdu or Marathi language as subject, but so far as State’s policy is concerned the State has considered four languages as the language subjects in the State of Gujarat. It is suggested that this is a policy decision based on the decision of GCERT. 7.2. It is also submitted that there are almost eight different language medium schools apart from Gujarati to impart education, where respective language is taught as an additional subject in other medium school as per the NCERT norms in all the primary schools amongst the languages four languages are to be taught like Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanskrit. Therefore, the Primary Schools would require Vidhyasahayaks for Gujarati, English, Hindi, and Sanskrit languages. The languages other than these are not to be taught as a main subject and this is based on the communication of GCERT dated 11.07.2012, which is an authority for the purpose of determining curriculum. This decision is of the expert body notified by the appropriate Government. 8. The newly added respondents who are successful candidates and were permitted to be joined in the petition as respondents by various orders have also filed their respective replies in support of the selection procedure and have submitted that so far as the language or Gujarati/English/Hindi and Sanskrit is concerned, it is in the syllabus of Std. 1 to 8 as a language and thereby a special teacher is required to be appointed. In the present case, the advertisement is for Std. 6 to 8 and after 2008 for the first time, such an advertisement is published in view of RTE Act and therefore, when the answering respondents are possessing the requisite qualification and they are already selected they are required to be given appointment. It is to be further pointed out that many teachers who are working in the Urdu Mediumschools after getting the chance of upgradation, they went in Upper Primary Section therefore in Std. It is to be further pointed out that many teachers who are working in the Urdu Mediumschools after getting the chance of upgradation, they went in Upper Primary Section therefore in Std. 6 to 8 in Urdu medium school, many teachers are having B.A. and B.Ed. with Urdu. Therefore, there is no requirement of Urdu subject in Urdu medium. In this view of the fact also, the prayers for separate Urdu language teacher is not justified. 8.1. Similarly, individual applications were made by other selected candidates for joining party and said applications were also allowed by various orders in the respective Civil Applications. It may not be necessary to refer to each such individual application suffice it to say that successful candidates in the selection process were also permitted to be joined the litigation. It would be however, to refer to order passed in Civil Application No.3 of 2018 in Special Civil Application No.9743 of 2018, whereby by order dated 18.09.2018 which was pertaining to the appointment of Vidhya Sahayaks in the subjects other than the languages and such issue in the petitions pertained only to the appointment of Vidhya Sahayaks in the language subject. The said Civil Application No.3 of 2018 came to be disposed by an order dated 18.09.2018 directing the authorities to proceed with the requirement of Vidhya Sahayaks of subjects other than the language subject. 9. In rejoinder, it is submitted that the factual position which is emerging from the selection Process initiated by advertisement dated 22.01.2017 for 19 vacancies of language subject and by the advertisement dated 13.06.2018 for 16 vacancies of language subject, is that on one hand, there are total 19 petitioners before the Court who have themselves studied in Urdu Medium and who are claiming to be appointed as teacher of language subject in Urdu Medium Primary Schools and there are 16 private respondents before the Court who claim to be eligible for appointment merely because they have passed one paper of Urdu as external student at Std. 12 Examination. Thus, there are total 35 candidates claiming to be appointed, and, on the other hand, there are total 19 + 16 = 35 vacancies to be filled up. Therefore, in the interest of justice both the petitions being SCA No. 4927 of 2017 and SCA No. 9743 of 2018 may be disposed of by directing the respondent Nos. 12 Examination. Thus, there are total 35 candidates claiming to be appointed, and, on the other hand, there are total 19 + 16 = 35 vacancies to be filled up. Therefore, in the interest of justice both the petitions being SCA No. 4927 of 2017 and SCA No. 9743 of 2018 may be disposed of by directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to give appointments to all the candidates who are before the Court. 10. The Court has heard rival submissions of the parties and perused the documents placed on record. The challenge is to the Annexure-C which is a notice which is uploaded on the website of the respondents, wherein the petitioners whose applications were accepted physically under the directions of this Court in its order dated 02.02.2017 in Special Civil Application No.1918 of 2017 were declared to be ineligible. That they do not possess requisite eligibility as provided for in the Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011, which prescribes the degree in language namely Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanskrit as an essential requirement for being eligible and accordingly, the list of 18 candidates was displayed whose names were not included in the merit list. For this reason, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011 to the extent of it prescribing the requirement of B.A. in English, Gujarati, Hindi and Sanskrit as a eligibility criteria. In support of very arguments as it is argued that it does not appeal to logic that an individual who has completed his education throughout in Urdu medium is treated as ineligible, whereas an individual who studied in other language, but has cleared Urdu as a subject in the board examination can be treated as eligible candidate for imparting education in Urdu medium school. 10.1. At this stage, it would be appropriate to refer to the object behind the passing of the Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011 as well as Government Resolution dated 26.04.2016. 10.1. At this stage, it would be appropriate to refer to the object behind the passing of the Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011 as well as Government Resolution dated 26.04.2016. The Government Resolution dated 27.04.2011 is pertaining to the appointment of Vidhya Sahayak in the upper primary schools under the District Education Committee, wherein pursuant to the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Gujarat Educational Laws (Amendment) Act, 2010, the Government of India has decided to consider Standard-1 to 8 as the Primary Education in the State in lieu of Standard-1 to 7 and out of which, Standard-1 to 5 shall be considered as Primary Education and Standard-6 to 8 shall be considered as Upper Primary Education. With respect to the aforementioned changes, the resolution dated 15/04/10 was issued for the recruitment of the Vidhyasahyak/primary teachers in primary education and upper primary education, wherein the qualifications and process for the recruitment of the Vidhyasahyak/primary teachers of primary education and upper primary education were fixed. Thereafter, vide the notification of National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi mentioned, the educational qualifications for the primary teachers and upper primary teachers were fixed afresh. With respect to the same, need has arisen to make changes in the resolution dated 15/08/10 of the Education Department. Due to the aforesaid change, the minimum qualifications for the recruitment of primary teachers have been fixed as per the standard and qualifications prescribed in the Schedule of Sections– 19 and 25 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Notification No. Fa.N.61/03/20/2010 N.C.T.E. (N&S) dated 23/08/10 of the National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi. As per the powers conferred under Sections- 54 and 63 of the Mumbai Primary Education Act, 1947, after careful consideration, the Government has decided to fix following criteria for the recruitment of the Vidhyasahayak in the primary schools and upper primary schools of the District Primary Education Committees and Nagar Prathmik Shikshan Samiti. 10.2. The Resolution in Clause 1 provides for primary teachers/Vidhya Sahayaks while clause 2 provides for selection criteria for upper primary school teachers/Vidhya Sahayaks. Sub clause of clause 2 provides for the educational qualification for the respective subjects and allotment of marks on the basis of their educational qualification. 10.2. The Resolution in Clause 1 provides for primary teachers/Vidhya Sahayaks while clause 2 provides for selection criteria for upper primary school teachers/Vidhya Sahayaks. Sub clause of clause 2 provides for the educational qualification for the respective subjects and allotment of marks on the basis of their educational qualification. The issue before this Court is sub-clause B pertaining to the teacher/vidhya sahayak of languages wherein clause-I which prescribed the education and training eligibility for language teachers which would read as under: (I) Educational and Trainee Qualification: Educational Qualification : B.A. (English/Gujarati/Hindi/Sanskrit) Trainee Qualification: Two years P.T.C. OR Educational Qualification : B.A.(English/Gujarati/Hindi/Sanskrit) with minimum 45% marks. Trainee Qualification : One year B.Ed. OR Educational Qualification: Minimum 50% marks in Standard–12 (H.S.C.) and Trainee Qualification: Four Years Bachelor in Elementary Education (B.El.Ed.) OR Educational Qualification : Minimum 50% marks in Standard–12 (H.S.C.) and Trainee Qualification : Four years B.A. (English/Gujarati/Hindi/Sanskrit) Education (BA.Ed.) OR Educational Qualification: B.A. (English) with minimum 50% marks and Trainee Qualification : One year B.Ed (Special Education). 10.3. The calculation of marks is under sub-clause III which is as under:- (III) Merit Rating: Weightage will be given as follows for the candidates who have the above educational / trainee qualifications and have obtained 60 percentage or higher than that of minimum marks prescribed in TET for preparation of selection list of the candidates: For the candidates having qualifications of B.A. (English / Gujarati / Hindi / Sanskrit), B. Ed. Out of the marks obtained in B. A. (English / Gujarati / Hindi / Sanskrit) 20 Percent Out of the marks obtained in M.A. (English / Gujarati / Hindi / Sanskrit) 05 Percent Out of the marks obtained in B. Ed. / P.T.C. 25 Percent Out of the marks obtained in T.E.T. 50 Percent OR Following marking system shall have to be followed for the candidate having qualification of integrated B. Ed. Out of the marks obtained in Integrated B.A.B.Ed. 45 Percent Out of the marks obtained in M.A. 05 Percent Out of the marks obtained in T.E.T. 50 Percent 10.4. In so far as the Resolution dated 26.04.2012 is concerned, it was specifically issued for the purpose of appointment of teachers in language in the school imparting education in the other languages like Urdu, Marathi, Sindhi etc. 45 Percent Out of the marks obtained in M.A. 05 Percent Out of the marks obtained in T.E.T. 50 Percent 10.4. In so far as the Resolution dated 26.04.2012 is concerned, it was specifically issued for the purpose of appointment of teachers in language in the school imparting education in the other languages like Urdu, Marathi, Sindhi etc. and the purpose for passing a resolution was as under:- “Right to Education Act, 2009 has been implemented in the State w.e.f. 01/04/2010. According to its provisions, Standard- 8 is included in Primary Education Department stage-wise and primary education is bifurcated into two stages (a) Primary Education (Standard-1 to 5) and (b) Upper Primary Education (Standard-6 to 8). Under the power conferred vide the provisions of the Right to Education Act, 2009, NCTE has fixed the qualifications of the teachers of primary education and Upper primary education and made it mandatory to pass Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) to become a teacher. Besides Gujarati Medium, there are schools of other mediums such as English, Hindi, Urdu, Marathi, Sindhi, Telugu etc. in Gujarat. TET is mandatory for the recruitment of the teachers of these mediums also. Wide number of English Medium schools are there along-with Gujarati. Hindi schools are also in ample numbers and as Hindi is the national language, TET can be conducted in all these three mediums. It is necessary to pass Standard-12 and P.T.C. to become a teacher in Lower Primary Education (Standard-1 to 5). Likewise, minimum educational qualification for the Upper Primary Education is Graduation Level. Examinations of both these educational qualifications (Standard-12 and Graduation) are conducted only in Gujarati, English and Hindi in the State of Gujarat. Therefore, every candidate would be acquainted with any of these three mediums. Besides this, if the medium in which candidate wants to be teacher, is different from these three mediums, it is necessary that he/she can teach in that medium as well as having knowledge thereof. Considering all these facts, the matter was under consideration of the Government as to under which medium, TET should be conducted for different mediums and what provisions should be made for other mediums. Considering aforesaid facts, at the end of intensive consideration, the Government has decided regarding TET to become teacher of Primary Education (Standard-1 to 5) and Upper Primary Education (Standard-6 to 8) in various mediums as under.” 11. Considering aforesaid facts, at the end of intensive consideration, the Government has decided regarding TET to become teacher of Primary Education (Standard-1 to 5) and Upper Primary Education (Standard-6 to 8) in various mediums as under.” 11. It is required to be noted that the requirement of filling up the post as per the advertisement at Annexure-A is that of the language. Those languages are Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanskrit, which are prescribed languages as per the policy framed based on the decision of GCERT. At this stage, it would be necessary to refer that post the advent of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, the appointments of Vidya Sahayaks are being made for Primary Division (Std. 1-5) and Upper Primary Division (Std 6-8). There are by and large Gujarati, English and Hindi Medium Schools across the State. Over and above the said classes of schools there are Urdu, Tamil, Telugu Medium Schools as well. The appointing authority for Vidya Sahayaks is the District Primary Education Committee which is headed by the District Primary Education Officer. Appointments and requirements for appointments are intimated to the Gujarat Primary Education Selection Committee through requisitions which are then approved if deemed fit in accordance with the Rules prescribed in that regard. It is in consideration of the above scenario that after expert deliberation the policies of the State Government are formulated and the minimum educational qualification for Vidya Sahayak of an Other Medium School (all mediums other than Gujarati, English and Hindi) particularly for languages are determined in GR dated 27.04.2011 and fortified in GR dated 20.01.2017 accordingly. 12. In the State of Gujarat there are different language medium schools which are as under: (1) Gujarati Medium Primary Schools (2) English Medium Primary Schools (3) Hindi Medium Primary Schools (4) Marathi Medium Primary Schools (5) Urdu Medium Primary Schools (6) Udiya Medium Primary Schools (7) Tamil Medium Primary Schools (8) Telugu Medium Primary Schools Thus, in as many as 8 different languages Primary Education in State of Gujarat is imparted. The language of Marathi, Udiya, Urdu, Tamil or Telugu is to be taught as additional subject in the other medium schools. However, as per the NCERT norms in all the Primary Schools among all above languages, only four language subjects i.e. Gujarati, English, Hindi Sanskrit are to be taught. The language of Marathi, Udiya, Urdu, Tamil or Telugu is to be taught as additional subject in the other medium schools. However, as per the NCERT norms in all the Primary Schools among all above languages, only four language subjects i.e. Gujarati, English, Hindi Sanskrit are to be taught. In a primary school which is Marathi language, Urdu language, Udiya language, Tamil language or Telugu language, there is no requirement of special teacher for teaching any subject of that particular language medium in standard 6 to 8. Similarly in Primary Schools where medium of instruction is Urdu language, there is no need of Urdu language teacher. There will be need of teacher teaching Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanskrit language subjects with the knowledge of Urdu language and for that the State Government has taken a care of it by prescribing additional qualification for the post of language teacher for other medium school. Therefore, the Primary Schools would require Vidhyasahayaks for Gujarati, English, Hindi, and Sanskrit languages. The languages other than these are not to be taught as a main subject and this is based on the communication of GCERT dated 11.07.2012, which is an authority for the purpose of determining curriculum. This decision is of the expert body notified by the appropriate Government. 13. Therefore, in the opinion of the Court where the appointment is for the language teachers prescribed in Government Resolution to be the languages in subject language being Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanskrit, prescribing the educational qualification of B.A. in the respective language will be essential. The students who are taught the aforesaid languages are required to be taught such languages by the candidates/teachers who are having the qualification in such languages. If the submission of the petitioners are to be accepted then, it would mean that the languages of Gujarati, Hindi, English and Sanskrit can be taught by an individual who may not have graduation/B.A. in the respective language in Urdu medium school or having graduation in Urdu. 13.1. In the opinion of the Court, for teacher to be able to teach the language has to have the professional qualification like graduation in the respective language and as the medium of communication being Urdu in the Urdu medium school, such teachers must have proficiency in the Urdu language. 13.1. In the opinion of the Court, for teacher to be able to teach the language has to have the professional qualification like graduation in the respective language and as the medium of communication being Urdu in the Urdu medium school, such teachers must have proficiency in the Urdu language. The requirement of proficiency in Urdu language accepted by the State when it communicated and granted for appointment in Urdu medium who have passed subject of Urdu in 12th standard or a knowledge of Urdu which is evident if he has passed TET of such language which may be conducted even by the Central Government and therefore, in the opinion of the Court, the educational qualification prescribed by the Government Resolution of 2011 and proficiency criteria prescribed in 2012 resolution is properly prescribed to cater to the need of the students to study the respective subjects. 13.2. The specifying of the criteria being a matter of policy, the jurisdiction of this Court to interfere with such policy is well prescribed by various decisions of the Apex Court in case of J.P.Kulshreshtha v/s. Chancellor, Allahabad, reported in 1980 (3) SCC 418 , wherein the Apex Court has stated as under: “17.Rulings of this Court were cited before us to hammer home the point that the Court should not substitute its judgment for that of academicians when the dispute relates to educational affairs. While there is no absolute ban, it is a rule of prudence that courts should hesitate to dislodge decisions of academic bodies. But university organs, for that matter any authority in our system, is bound by the rule of law and cannot be a law unto itself If the Chancellor or any other authority lesser in level decides an academic matter or an educational question, the Court keeps its hands off; but where a provision of law has to be read and understood, it is not fair to keep the Court out. In Govinda Rao's case (1) Gajendragadkar, J (as he they was) struck the right note: "What the High Court should have considered is whether file appointment made by the Chancellor Had contravened any statutory or finding rule or ordinance, and in doing so, the High Court should have shown due regard to the opinions expressed by the Board and its recommendations on which the Chancellor has acted. (Emphasis added). (Emphasis added). The later decisions cited before us broadly conform to the rule of caution sounded in Govinda Rao. But to respect an authority is not to worship it unquestioningly since the bhakti cult is inept in the critical field of law. In short, while dealing with legal affairs which have an impact on academic bodies, the views of educational experts are entitled to great consideration but not to exclusive wisdom. Moreover, the present case is so simple that profound doctrines about academic autonomy have no place here.” 14. Similarly, in case of Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education and Anr. v/s. Paritosh Bhupesh Kumar Sheth Etc., reported in 1985 (1) SCR 29 . The Supreme Court has held as under:- “In our opinion, the aforesaid approach made by the High Court is wholly incorrect and fallacious. The Court cannot sit in judgment over the wisdom of the policy evolved by the legislature and the subordinate regulation-making body. It may be a wise policy which will fully effectuate the purpose of the enactment or it may be lacking in effectiveness and hence calling for revision and improvement. But any drawbacks in the policy incorporated in a rule or regulation will not render it ultra vires and the Court cannot strike it down on the ground that, in its opinion, it is not a wise or prudent policy, but is even a foolish one, and that it will not really serve to effectuate the purposes of the Act. The legislature and its delegate are the sole repositories of the power to decide what policy should be pursued in relation to matters covered by the Act and there is no scope for interference by the Court unless the particular provision impugned before it can be said to suffer from any legal infirmity, in the sense of its being wholly beyond the scope of the regulation-making power or its being inconsistent with any of the provisions of the parent enactment or in violation of any of the limitations imposed by the Constitution.” 15. From the record, it appears that this Court vide order dated 15.03.2017 has issued rule and had granted interim relief in terms of para-23(H) by which the further process of recruitment of Vidhya Sahayaks for Urdu medium school pursuant to the advertisement dated 22.01.2017 was ordered to be stayed. From the record, it appears that this Court vide order dated 15.03.2017 has issued rule and had granted interim relief in terms of para-23(H) by which the further process of recruitment of Vidhya Sahayaks for Urdu medium school pursuant to the advertisement dated 22.01.2017 was ordered to be stayed. However, thereafter, at various point of time interim applications have been filed by those candidates who are successful in selection for joining as party respondents which were also opposed by the petitioners however, by a detailed order dated 18.09.2018 and 08.01.2019 in Civil Application Nos01 of 2018 and 05 of 2018 in 9743 of 2017, this Court by assigning detailed reasons, allowed the Civil Applications by permitting the candidates successful in the recruitment to be joined as party respondents. From the affidavits filed by the successful candidates, it has come on record that the successful candidates are satisfying the requirement for the appointment in the language teachers in the Urdu Medium Schools as per the Govt. Resolution dated 27.04.2011 and the answering respondents are fulfilling the criteria. Therefore, they are selected and they are required to be given appointment. Their qualifications are as under:- Sr No Name Qualification Subject for which applied Standards studied in Urdu language 1 Mustak Ahmedbhai Sheikh M.A., B.Ed, English English 10 & 12 2 Zuber Shokat Paya B.A., B.Ed, Hindi Hindi 10 & 12 3 Muhammedanas Shokat Tidi M.A., B.Ed, English Gujarati 10 & 12 4 Ansari Nazmeen Amanullah M.A., B.Ed, English English 10 & 12 5 Ansari Kiranzen Gulam Mohmed M.A., B.Ed, English English 1 to 12 6 Malek Zefar Kalim Sabir M.A., B.Ed, English English 1 to 12 From the above, it is very clear that the they are possessing the requisite qualification as per the Government Resolution dated 28.04.2016. 16. The close scrutiny of the Government Resolutions in the opinion of the Court are in consonance with the larger State education policy and appears to have been issued pursuant to deliberations by the experts and in consonance with the Right to Education Act for whose purpose, resolutions have been passed predominately. The Court does not find any reason to interfere on the ground of same being illegal, contrary, illogical and going against the interest of the beneficiaries. 17. In view of the aforesaid, the Court is not inclined to interfere the petitions. The petitions therefore, deserve to be and hereby dismissed. The Court does not find any reason to interfere on the ground of same being illegal, contrary, illogical and going against the interest of the beneficiaries. 17. In view of the aforesaid, the Court is not inclined to interfere the petitions. The petitions therefore, deserve to be and hereby dismissed. Rule is discharged. 18. In view of the orders passed in the main petitions, no further orders are requires to be passed in the connected Civil Applications and hence, stand disposed of accordingly. 19. Considering the fact that this Court has initially stayed the appointments to the post of language teacher and has continued till today the Court, deems it fit to continue such stay which is operating till today for further period of 2 weeks from today.