The main legal point established in the judgment is that the decision of the Full Bench should have prospective effect, not retrospective, and should not disturb appointments made based on prior NOCs.

( 1 ) RULE. Service of notice of rule is waived by learned AGP Mr. Amit Patel on behalf of the respondent State Authority. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with consent of both the learned Advocates, matter is taken up for final hearing today.

( 2 ) HEARD learned Advocate Mr. BP Jasani for petitioner and Mr. Amit Patel, learned AGP for State Authority.

( 3 ) PROPOSAL for obtaining NOC for the post of Vidya Sahayak was made by petitioner on 21. 8. 2006. The District Education Officer granted NOC for recruitment of Vidya Sahayak on 3. 8. 2006. Thereafter, on 28. 10. 2006, public advertisement was given in Sandesh Daily News Paper inviting applications. ON 5. 12. 2006, duly constituted selection committee selected respondent No. 4 for the post of Vidya Sahayak and on 7. 12. 2006, respondent No. 4 came to be appointed as Vidya Sahayak having qualification of B. Com. , BP Ed and respondent No. 4 resumed duty on 12. 12. 2006. Thereafter, on 15. 12. 2006, proposal was made by the petitioner to the District Education Officer for necessary approval but on12. 2. 2007, the District Education Officer informed the petitioner that according to the decision given by the Full Bench of this Court wherein in is held that the trained Graduate cannot be appointed as Vidya Sahayak and, therefore, no approval can be granted and, therefore, petitioner was informed by the said letter to obtain NOC a fresh for filling up the said post and to initiate process for interview accordingly.

( 4 ) LEARNED Advocate Mr. Jasani for petitioner submits that the NOC was granted by the District Education Officer and accordingly, process for selection of Vidya Sahayak was carried out by the petitioner wherein respondent No. 4 came to be selected and appointed. He submits that at that time, the District Education Officer has not considered that the respondent No. 4 is not a trained teacher as per the decision of the Full Bench of this Court. Learned Advocate Mr. Jasani further submitted that the decision is given by the Full Bench on 8. 1. 2007 and before that, NOC was granted by the District Education Officer, process of selection was over and appointment order was issued in favour of respondent No. 4 and he took over charge prior to the decision of the Full Bench of this Court. Therefore, learned Advocate Mr. Jasani raised legal contention that the decision of the Full Bench of this Court cannot have retrospective effect but it will be having prospective effect, otherwise, it would have been clarified by the Full Bench. He also submits that the judgment delivered by this Court must specify as to whether it is having prospective effect or retrospective effect and if it has not been clarified, then, it has to be construed that the same is having only prospective effect and therefore, action or the decision which has been taken prior to the decision of the Full Bench of this Court on the Basis of the NOC granted by the District Education Officer cannot be tested or disturbed on the basis of the subsequent decision of the Full Bench of this Court.

( 5 ) MR. Amit Patel has argued while supporting the decision of the District Education Officer but he has not been able to point out that the decision of the Full Bench of this Court is having retrospective effect. In this matter, in response to the notice issued by this Court, respondent State Authority has not filed any affidavit in reply.

( 6 ) I have considered the submissions made by both the learned Advocates. I have perused the documents on record, more particularly NOC granted by the District Education Officer dated 3. 10. 2006. From perusal of the NOC dated 3. 10. 2006, it does not appear that it is subject to the decision that may be given by the Full Bench of this Court. NO such rider has been incorporated in the NOC. Therefore, when entire exercise has been carried out by the petitioner on the basis of the NOC granted by the District Education Officer and when the process of selecti