( 1 ) ADMIT. Learned Government Pleader Shri Sunit Shah waives service in both the appeals.

( 2 ) IN these appeals, a common judgment delivered in Special Civil Applications Nos. 3740 and 3741 of 2007 dated 9th February, 2007 has been challenged and, therefore, at the request of the learned advocates, both the appeals have been heard together and decided by this common judgment.

( 3 ) THE facts giving rise to the appeals, in a nutshell, are as under:

3. 1 The appellants-petitioners had passed Higher Secondary Certificate Examination with science subjects i. e. from the Science Stream. They applied for being appointed to the post of Vidya Sahayak (a post similar to a primary school teacher) under one of the schemes framed by the respondent State of Gujarat. For being admitted to PTC course, reservation has been made to the effect that 30% of the admissions are given to students from the science stream. Upon passing HSC examination from science stream, the appellants-petitioners were admitted to PTC course, and upon completing the said course successfully, they have applied for being appointed to the post of Vidya Sahayaks. It is the case of the appellants-petitioners that though they have secured very good marks at PTC course , they are not likely to be selected as Vidya Sahayaks because, in the merit list, which is to be prepared for appointment to the post of Vidya Sahayaks, their numbers would be at such a low place that they would not be appointed to the said post.

3. 2 According to the appellants, in the process of selection as Vidya Sahayaks, 40% weightage is given to the marks secured at HSC Examination, whereas 60% weightage is given to marks secured at PTC examination. Thus, 40% weightage is being given to marks secured at HSC Examination, and as the appellants had secured relatively less marks at HSC Examination, the appellants shall not be selected as Vidya Sahayaks.

3. 3 It was their case before the learned Single Judge that so as to have more students from the science stream as Primary School Teachers/vidya Sahayaks, the State of Gujarat had framed a policy, whereby 30% reservation was made for students from the science stream for being given admission to PTC course. Once reservation is given to the science stream students at the time of admission, according to the appellants, in the matter of selection of Primary School Teachers/vidya Sahayaks also, some reservation should be provided for science stream students so that such trained teachers from the science stream can teach subjects like Science and Maths in a much better manner than other teachers, who are from the General Stream, that is, those who had opted for subjects other than Science and Maths.

3. 4 It was their case before the learned Single Judge that unless some reservation is provided for appointment to the post of Vidya Sahayaks for the science stream candidates, the purpose with which admission was given to science stream students at PTC course would become meaningless as relatively very few science stream students are ultimately selected as Vidya Sahayaks.

3. 5 After considering the aforesaid submissions and looking to the facts of the case, the petitions have been rejected by the learned Single Judge mainly for the reason that in the case of Parmar Alpaben v. State of Gujarat 2004 (3) GLR 2429, a Division Bench of this Court has held that simply because 30% reservation was given at the stage of admission to PTC course to students from the science stream, claim of such science stream candidates for reservation in employment on that basis was not justified. In view of the aforesaid judgment delivered by the Division Bench, which was binding upon the learned Single Judge, the petitions have been rejected. It was also observed by the learned Single Judge that it would not be the function of the court to give direction with regard to making some change in the policy and, therefore also, the petitions could not have been entertained. Mo