RAM PARKASH DHAWAN Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of three Civil Writ Petitions 2579 of 1983, 299 and 3644 of 1984 in which common questions of law and facts arise and the relief prayed for is also the same. For the sake of convenience facts are being taken from CWP 299 of 1984.

(2.) Some of the petitioners were recruited as teachers in the erstwhile State of Pepsu and the others were appointed in the joint State of Punjab before its reorganisation. While in service they all improved their qualifications by passing B.A., B.Ed. and B.T. examinations. The State Government as per its circular letter dated July, 23, 1957 decided to revise the existing scales of pay of certain categories of posts including those of the teachers w.e.f. May 1, 1957. It was decided that all teachers according to their qualifications be placed in two broad categories, namely, Category 'A' and Category 'B'. Teachers in category 'A' were those possessing the qualifications of B.A./B.Sc./B.Com./B.Sc. (Agriculture) and B.T. (Diploma in Physical Education/Diploma in Senior Basic Training whereas teachers with lower qualifications were put in category 'B'. The effect of this decision was that all teachers henceforth would draw their pay in a scale according to their qualifications. Petitioners who had improved their qualifications were given the grade fixed for category 'A' teachers, namely, Masters w.e.f. the dates when they acquired the higher qualifications though they were not promoted as Masters. It may be mentioned that the scale of Masters was Rs. 110-225. There were a large number of teachers in the State who had improved their qualifications and were given the higher grade of Masters though they continued to work as teachers in category 'B'. It was for the benefit of such unadjusted teachers that the State Government issued the instructions dated 7.11.1958. As per these instructions, it was decided that 25% posts of B.T./B.Ed. teachers in the Masters' grade of Rs. 110-225 would be filled by promotion from amongst the teachers working in lower grade who had passed the B.A./B.Ed examinations. The selection was to be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit with due regard to good reputation. In spite of these instructions, the State Government did not adhere to the 25% quota nor was the same determined. Some of the unadjusted teachers like the petitioners filed Civil Writ Petitions 4181 of 1971 (Nirmaljit Kaur and others v. Union of India and others in the Court for a direction to the respondents to appoint the unadjusted teachers to the extent of 25% quota reserved for them for each year in accordance with the instructions dated 7.11.1958. This writ petition was allowed on 2.5.1972 and the unadjusted teachers were held entitled to be appointed to the posts of Masters to the extent of 25% quota for each year reserved for them and they were also held entitled to the Masters' grade from the day they acquired the B.T./B.Ed. qualifications. In compliance with the directions issued by this court, the respondents therein granted the necessary relief to the petitioners therein but did not grant the same to other similarly unadjusted teachers on the ground that they were not petitioners in that petition. The result was that some more unadjusted teachers similarly situated filed Civil Writ Petition 4748 of 1974 (Brij Lal Goel and others v. The State of Punjab and others) for a similar direction to the effect that they be appointed to fill up 25% posts in the regular cadre of Masters reserved for them. This writ petition was also allowed and a similar direction was issued and the respondents were directed to fix their inter- se seniority in the cadre of Masters in accordance with the service rules. Again, in compliance with the directions issued in this case, the respondents gave the relief to only those unadjusted teachers who were petitioners in Brij Lal Goel's case and did not extend the benefit to others who were similarly situated. It was then that the present petitions were filed by the petitioners who are also unadjusted teachers and have been given the Masters' grade but have not been appointed against the 25% seats reserved for them. The prayer made in these petitions is that the respondents be directed to implement the directions issued by this Court in Nirmaljit Kaur's case and Brij Lal Goel's case in their case as well and they be appointed in the cadre of Masters and that their inter-se seniority in that cadre be fixed.

(3.) In the written statement, filed on behalf of the respondents, it is pleaded that a joint petition is not maintainable on behalf of the petitioners who have an independent cause of action. It is admitted that the unadjusted teachers who filed CWP 4181 of 1971 [Nirmaljit Kaur's case ] and CWP 4748 of 1974 [Brij Lal Goel's case ] were adjusted against the 25% quota posts reserved for them and it is stated that in case any eligible unadjusted teacher has been left out it is open to him/her to represent his/her case to the Government. It is also pleaded that in pursuance to the directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid two cases, the seniority of only the petitioners therein was to be fixed which was done and a tentative seniority list was issued and objections invited.