VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.

1. Looking to the urgency and at the joint request made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final disposal.

2. By way of this appeal, which is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellants-original respondents (hereinafter referred to as ‘the respondents' for the sake of convenience) seek to challenge an order dated 18.07.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the learned Single Judge granted interim relief in favour of the present respondents-original petitioners (hereinafter referred to as ‘the petitioners' for the sake of convenience).

3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:

3.1 It is the case of the petitioners that they were duly selected and appointed as primary teachers under the appellants-original respondents on the basis of their qualifications of SSC/HSC and PTC/ATD. Presently, they are serving as Head Teachers in their respective primary schools. It is their case that their appointment as Head Teacher has been made in accordance with their seniority as per the prevalent policy. The petitioners are discharging their duties as Head Teachers as laid down in Rule 70 of the Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949 made under the Bombay Primary Education Act, 1947.

3.2 It is stated that the Schedule of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 provides for appointment of Head Teacher if there are stipulated children in Class I to VIII. However, the respondent State Authorities did not create two separate cadres of Head Teachers for Lower Primary Schools (standard I to V) and Head Teachers for Upper Primary Schools (standard VI to VIII). It is further stated that the State Government issued notification dated 18.01.2012 laying down the Recruitment Rules for the post of Head Teachers without making any distinction between the Head Teachers of Lower Primary Schools and Head Teachers of Upper Primary Schools.

3.3 The petitioner have placed reliance upon the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 296 of 2014, and more particularly, the observations made in para 30 to 33 of the order dated 01.12.2014 passed in the said appeal.

3.4 The Petitioners have also placed reliance upon the orders dated 29.12.2016 and 27.12.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Special Civil Application No. 14901 of 2013 and 15647 of 2013.

3.5 The petitioners have further submitted that the State Government has made Recruitment Rules for the Head Teachers by way of Education Department's Notification dated 22.09.2016 and in the said Rules provision is made for appointment of Head Teachers by promotion from the cadre of Lower Primary Teacher and Upper Primary Teacher, Class III in the ratio of 3:2 respectively. However, the Rules for Head Teachers Aptitude Test (H-TAT) are yet to be appropriately changed. It is the grievance of the petitioners that in the meantime the respondent authorities have initiated new recruitment of Head Teachers by advertisement dated 22.01.2017 Therefore, the concerned existing Head Teachers preferred Special Civil Application No. 2345 of 2017. The said petition came to be disposed of by learned Single Judge by an order dated 10.02.2017 Petitioners have placed reliance upon the directions given by the learned Single Judge in the said order. Petitioners, therefore, on 14.03.2017, filed the captioned petition wherein the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

“(a) to admit this petition and to allow the same;

(b) to restrain the respondents their agents and servants from giving any appointments as Head Teachers without first earmarking the posts of Head Teachers for Lower Primary Schools (Stds. 1 to 5) and for Upper Primary Schools (Stds. 6 to 8) and without earmarking the posts to be filled up by promotion and the posts to be filled up by direct recruitment in both the sections-Lower Primary Schools (Std. I to V) and Upper Pr