PER KUKDAY, J.

( 1 ) RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. Petition is taken up for final hearing with the consent of the respective Advocates, who waive service.

( 2 ) PETITIONER possesses B. A, B. P. Ed, qualifications. He came to be appointed as an Assistant Teacher by the respondent no. 5 School on 1. 7. 1994. The petitioner submitted an application dated 4. 10. 2004 seeking admission to Postal D. Ed. course. The Officers of the respondent no. 2, however, expressed their inability to consider the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, approached this Court by filing a Petition being writ Petition No: 2898/2005. The petition was disposed of by an order dated 3. 5. 2005 directing the respondent no. 2 to consider the claim of the petitioner for admission to the said course in accordance with the government policy. By communication dated 17. 8. 2005 the petitioner was intimated that admission to postal D. Ed. course is refused on the ground that petition filed by trained graduate teachers is pending in this Court. The petitioner has impugned this communication in the present petition and seeks a direction to respondent no. 2 to admit him to Postal D. Ed. course for the academic year 2004-05.

( 3 ) HEARD respective Advocates at length. The impugned communication dated 17th August 2005 shows that admission to said course was refused on the ground that Petition of the trained graduate teachers is pending in the High Court. Thus, the only point for consideration is whether admission to the petitioner can be refused to Postal D. Ed. course on the ground that writ Petition of trained graduate teachers is pending in this court.

( 4 ) LEARNED AGP has referred to the compilation of judgment in respect of admission to Postal D. Ed. course, including the judgment of the Full bench reported in the matter of Jayashree Sunil Chavan v. State of maharashtra, and others wherein this Court has considered the qualifications prescribed by Rule 6 read with Schedule "b" of the M. E. P. S. Rules, 1981; and held that as per the policy of the State, D. Ed. is the reguisite minimum qualification for teaching students in Primary Schools and B. Ed. cannot be treated as equivalent qualification to D. Ed. According to learned AGP in view of the decision of Full Bench, Circular dated 12th november 2001 was issued for continuance of the services of the trained graduate teachers appointed in Primary school as untrained Primary teachers. However Writ Petition No: 3553/2002 came to be filed, challenging the Government Resolution and the Circular. By order dated 3rd July 2002, the petition came to be admitted and interim relief with a direction that the impugned Government Resolution and Circular shall not be implemented until further orders in respect of rejection of the pay scales. According to learned AGP as the Government Resolution is stayed, the issue is now governed by the Government Resolution dated 14. 11. 1989. Therefore in view of the pendency of Writ Petition, the trained graduate are not given admission to Postal D. Ed. course. For this purpose, learned agp has made reference to the guidelines issued by the Government vide letter dated 2nd July 2004. Clause (4) thereof, makes a reference to the query as to whether admission should be given to Primary teachers for the academic year 2004-05 in consonance with Government Resolution dated 7. 11. 2001. in view of decision of the High Court in Writ Petition No: 4159/1998 dated 5. 5. 2000. The guidelines issued in this behalf was that in view of the pendency of the Writ Petition in the Court, no admission can be granted to the trained graduates as they are not entitled to benefit of explanation provided by g. R. dated 7. 11. 2001. Learned AGP, therefore contends that the petitioner is not entitled to admission to Postal D. Ed. course.

( 5 ) THIS contention cannot be sustained. It can be seen from the order in Writ Petition No: 3553/2002 that the impugned Government Resolution and Circu