(1.) THE Special Rules relating to an apex appointment in the Collegiate Education Department of the State is under challenge in this writ petition. THE complaint is that the rules in particular R. 3 (a) to the extent they exclude the Principals of Sanskrit Colleges from consideration for appointment to the post of Additional Director, contain the vice of discrimination, that the rule is inconsistent with the equality provisions of the Constitution, and is therefore bad.
(2.) THE skeletal idea indicated in the original petition as it was filed, got a clearer shape and better form by the additives of additional affidavits. An offensive stance was clearly discernible by then. A defensive fabric was put up. It cannot be claimed that there was deft handling of the weft and warp. THE yarn was one which got easily worn-out: all but one.
(3.) THE representation of the College Teachers about the stagnation at the level of Principals, apparently induced the Government to create the posts of Deputy Directors, a cadre equivalent to that of Principals. This was done by G. O. (MS) No. 86/75 dated 3-6-1975. Perhaps the same objective, prompted the creation of a post of Additional Director, on 5-2-1980 by an executive order. THE executive order got reflected in the amendment of the rules on 22-8-1980. THE Special Rules were amended again in 1985, under Ext. P1. Provisions were made as to the qualification and method of appointment as additional Director. Promotion to that post was from the Principals of Arts and science Colleges and the Training Colleges. THE Director's post was made a promotion post from that of the Additional Director.