ORDER : 1. By orders dated 28.04.2021 and 08.09.2021, the proposals sent to respondents 1 to 3 to approve the appointment of the petitioners as Secondary Grade Teachers are rejected by the first respondent. Since the self-same reasons are mentioned in respect of both the petitioners, who are appointed in the same school, both these writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by way of this common order. 2. The case of the petitioners is that as against the duly sanctioned vacancies, the petitioners were appointed by a due selection process and the petitioners are fully qualified to be appointed as Secondary Grade Teachers. While so, the impugned orders reject the petitioners' case on the ground that there are surplus posts in the joint management/in the same management in respect of other schools and without redeploying the teachers, approval cannot be granted. It is the case of the petitioners that there is only one school under the management and therefore, the reason mentioned in the impugned orders is factually erroneous. 3. Mr. Ravichandran, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, reiterating the said submissions made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petitions, would submit that when the petitioners are appointed as against the sanctioned vacancies, the approval has to be granted. 4. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader would submit that even though the reason mentioned in the impugned order may not be factually correct, the petitioners do not possess the TET qualification. In the absence of the essential qualification, the petitioners cannot be appointed. According to her, the matter is now pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in S.L.P. No. 2691 of 2022. 5. In reply thereof, Mr. Ravichandran, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, would rely upon the judgment of this Court in W.P. No. 5680 of 2024 dated 04.03.2024, whereunder considering the earlier Division Bench judgments of this Court, this Court had directed grant of approval even without TET qualification. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, when a Division Bench of this Court has taken a categorical view that the mandatory application of TET cannot be made in respect of the minority schools, then this Court has to go by the said view as on date. 6. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, when a Division Bench of this Court has taken a categorical view that the mandatory application of TET cannot be made in respect of the minority schools, then this Court has to go by the said view as on date. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the material records of the case. 7. As far as the reason which is mentioned in the impugned order, admittedly the same is incorrect, as the school is stand-alone school and there is no question of any redeployment. 8. As far as the possession of TET qualification is concerned, the same is now at large before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In the meanwhile, the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court taking a view that TET qualification cannot be insisted upon in respect of the minority schools has not since been stayed by the Supreme Court and orders are passed in respect of the identically situated teachers in W.P. No. 5680 of 2023, etc. Therefore, it can be open for the respondents to re-visit the matter as and when the question of law is authoritatively decided and pronounced by the Supreme Court of India, this Court cannot keep the matters pending and since the petitioners are all in service, the respondents are directed to grant approval for their appointment. 9. In view thereof, the writ petitions are allowed on the following terms: (a) The impugned orders bearing O.Mu.No. 0872/A3/2021 dated 28.04.2021 and O.Mu.No. 1467/A3/2021, dated 08.09.2021 shall stand quashed. (b) The respondents are directed to grant approval to the petitioners for their appointment as Secondary Grade Teachers within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (c) It is however made clear that depending on the ultimate pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, it would be open for the authorities to re-visit the grant of approval as per the decision of the Supreme Court. 10. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.