JUDGMENT

D. A. DESAI, J.:— In this group of writ petition, civil appeal, special leave petition and review petitions. a common question of law is raised whether Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR for short) and its affiliate Indian Veterinary Research Institute (IVRI for short) are either themselves the State or such other authority as would be comprehended in the expression Other authority in Article 12 of the Constitution?Re: W. P. No. 587/75 :

2. Petitioner No. 1 was Professor of Animal Pathology, petitioner No. 2 was Professor of Animal Genetics and petitioner No. 3 was Professor of Veterinary Parasitology, ail attached to IVRI Six posts of Professors one each in Animal Pathology, Animal Genetics, Veterinary Parasitology, Animal Nutrition, Bacteriology and Physiology were created on the introduction of the post-graduate wing in IVRI in 1958. At the relevant time the post of Professor carried the scale of Rs. 700-1250. Of the six posts, first mentioned, three posts of Profesors were held by the petitioners in their respective discipline. On the introduction of the scales recommended by the University Grants Commission, the pay scale attached to the post of Professor in IVRI was revised to Rs. 1100-1600. After the upward revision during the year 1970-71, the cadre of Professors in IVRI was expanded by creating six new posts of Professors in various disciplines. Surprisingly, each of the petitioners. who was already holding post of Professor, was not given the benefit of the upgraded scale attached to the Post of Professor while on the other hand the new incumbents recruited in the newly created posts in the year 1970-71 were awarded the revised scale of Rs. 1100-1600. This led to the disturbance in the inter se seniority in the cadre of Professors and manifested an anomalous position that the old incumbents of the posts of Professors such as petitioners, continued in the pre-revised scale of Rs. 700-1250 while the new incumbents were put in the revised scale of Rs. 1100-1606 both having the designation of Professor and there is no appreciable difference in the qualifications attached to the post. When this was brought to the notice of the authorities concerned, the ICAR with the concurrence of the Ministry of Finance resolved as per decision dated April 6, 1972 to award the revised scale of pay attached to the post of Professor to the petitioners, but this was subject to the condition that it would not be automatic but the existing incumbents of posts may be considered for revised scale along with other suitable persons. It was implicit in the condition Prescribed that the petitioners will have to stand in competition with other applicants, if there be any, and go through the hazard of a fresh selection for the post each one was already holding. This is the first grievance voiced by the petitioners in the writ petition contending that the petitioners were qualified for the posts of Professor and that each of them was holding the post from 1963, 1970 and 1970 respectively. The petitioners made various representations basing their claim inter alia on fair play, equality of Opportunity in the matter of public employment and equal pay for equal work as well as the provision contained in Fundamental. Rule 23. The petitioners also contend that they fulfil the minimum qualification prescribed for the post after upward revision of the pay-scale, and they have the requisite experience and that they are performing the same or identical duties as are being performed by newly recruited Professors in sister disciplines and that denial to them of the revised pay scales for the post of Professor apart from being discriminatory and violative of Article 14 is thoroughly arbitrary and unjustified. It appears that pursuant to the decision dated April 6, 1972, the ICAR issued an advertisement on May 21, 1974 inviting applications for the post of Professor In Animal Pathology, Animal Genetics and Veterinary Parasitology in the revised