JUDGMENT : The petitioners, who are 33 in numbers, appointed against regular vacancies of teaching staff which arose after 08.11.2021, are before this Court seeking to direct respondents 3 to 14 to approve the appointment of the petitioners on scale of pay provisionally from the date of their appointments in the light of Exts.P35 and P36 Circulars on submission of rosters and requisitions by respondents 15 to33, within a time frame. 2. It is discernible from the writ petition and arguments on either side that the approval was not granted to the appointment of the petitioners for various reasons including non-accommodation of PwD candidates against reserved vacancies and non-providing of rosters by the Managers. 3. The petitioners would submit that subsequently, the Managers of the School have submitted rosters and requisitions which are produced in this writ petition. In the changed circumstances, their proposals for approval of the appointment are liable to be allowed, contends the counsel for the petitioners. 4. Government Pleader entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. The Government Pleader pointed out that the appointments are not approved for multiple reasons. The Managers have not appointed PwD candidates against the reserved slots. Furthermore, the rosters were not provided by the Managers. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 14. 6. From the pleadings, it is evident that the Managers have provided certain rosters and requisitions to respondents 3 to 14, who are the Controlling Officers. It is also to be noted that subsequently, the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP(C) No.11373/2024 has passed an order dated 04.03.2025 to the effect that if post allocable to the Persons with Disabilities are reserved, then the approval of appointment of other Teachers can be granted on regular basis. In view of the said development also, I am of the view that grant of approval to the petitioners’ appointments is liable to be reconsidered. In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 3 to 14 to reconsider the proposals for approval of appointment of the petitioners, which is now on daily wage basis and pass appropriate orders approving the appointment and placing the petitioners in the pay scale in the light of the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court, provided the petitioners satisfy all other parameters. Orders in this regard shall be passed within a period of two months.