GIAN CHAND SHARMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are presently employed as Headmasters in various government schools in the State of Punjab seek an order from this Court that the directions in their favour already given in the case Nirmaljit Kaur vs. Union of India,1972 SLR 809be complied with and they like other members of their class (unadjusted B.T./B.Ed. teachers) be appointed to the post of masters in the regular cadre to the extent of 25 per cent quota reserved for thera in each year in accordance with the memorandum dated 7th November, 1958 Annexure P1 to the petition. The case of the petitioners is that despite the order in the aforesited case as also similar directions in C.W.R 4748 of 1974 (Brij Lal Goyal and others vs. The State of Punjab and others, decided on 8th April 1985, this benefit has not been given to them.

(2.) The case of the State and the private respondents who were directly recruited however is that the directions given by the Court in Nirmaljit Kaur's case had been complied with in letter and spirit as would be apparent from the pleadings on the file arid further that as the private respondents were not parties in the proceedings in Brij Lal Goyal's and Amar Nath Bansal's case those decisions were not binding on them, and were in view of the facts even otherwise redundant. It has also been asserted that on identical matter inter parties i.e. promotee and directly recruited masters, had come up to this Court in the case Kartar Singh Master and others vs. The State of Punjab and others,1979 1 SLR 544 and the Division Bench of this Court while considering the facts of Nirmaljit Kaur's case, dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the claim of the petitioners was belated.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their assistance. There appears to be positive merit in the stand of the respondents that the directions issued in Nirmaljit Kaur's case had already been complied with and the decisions rendered in Brij Lal Goyal's and Amar Nath Bansal's case were as a matter of fact redundant. In this connection, it is relevant that while disposing of Criminal Original No. 213-C of 1972 (Parshotam Lal Nirmal etc. vs. G.L.B. Bakshi, DPI Punjab etc.) vide judgment dated 16th July, 1973 appended as Annexure R-15/1 the learned Judge had taken note of the fact that the directions issued in Nirmajit Kaur's case had been complied with, with the result that it would not be said that any contempt of the court's order in that case had been committed. For arriving at this conclusion the court had relied on the affidavit in reply filed by Shri G.L.B. Bakshi, D.P.I. Punjab in the said contempt petition in which it had been specifically pleaded that the necessary relief flowing to the petitioners had been granted. It is, therefore, apparent in the light of the order in the contempt petition that the directions issued in favour of the petitioners stood fully complied with pay way back in 1973.