MAKHANLAL WAZA Vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 32 of the Constitution illustrates how an attempt has been made to circumvent the law declared by this Court in Triloki Nath v State of Jammu and Kashmir, (1969) 1 SCR 103 = (AIR 1969 SC 1 ) by which the State policy of reserving 50% of the vacancies among the teachers in the employment of the respondent State for the Muslims of Kashmir and out of the remaining 50 per cent, 40 Per cent for the Jamvi Hindus and 10 per cent for others including Kashmiri Pandits was struck down as contrary to the constitutional guarantee under Art. 16.

(2.) The Petitioners, who are 10 in number, are in the service of the Education Department of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. According to the petition, petitioner No. 1 joined service in 1952 as a teacher in the Government High School, Poonch. He had passed the Bachelor of Teaching Examination and was given the grade of Rs. 80-8-200. This grade which was of a non-gazetted post was later revised sometimes before 1964 to Rs. 150-500. The gazetted post carried a grade of Rs. 300-600. Petitioner No. 2 entered service of the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir in 1943 as teacher in the Government School. Tregham. He later on passed the examinations of Bachelor of Teaching and the Master of Arts and was selected in July 1968 for teaching in the Higher Secondary School. Petitioners 3 to 10 were trained graduates holding degrees of Bachelor of Education. Petitioners 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 and 10 had also passed the Master of Arts examination and with the exception of petitioner No. 10 were selected for teaching in Higher Secondary Schools in July 1968.

(3.) All the teachers and other officers of the Education Department of the State were governed by the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules, 1956 which were promulgated on June 14, 1956. Rule 9 relates to first appointment to a service or class. According to rule 19 in making the appointment to a service or class reservation may be made in favour of any backward class which, in the opinion of the Government, is not adequately represented in the services. Rule 24 dealt with seniority. Rule 25 to the extent it is material reads: