Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
S.B.Capoor, I.D.Dua and H.R.Khanna JJ.
Brijlal Goswami
Versus
State Of Punjab
Civil Writ No. 1088 of 1962,1089 of 1962,1090 of 1962,1091 of 1962,1092 of 1962,1093 of 1962,1114 of 1962,1115 of 1962,
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 11, 1964
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - ARTICLE 16 - EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY IN MATTERS OF PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT - PROMOTION - SENIORITY - BIFURCATION OF SERVICE INTO TWO CADRES - WHETHER VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 16 - PUNJAB SERVICES INTEGRATION RULES, 1957, RULE 16.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, who were members of the Punjab Educational Service (Class II) and were working in colleges on 1st November 1956, were shown in College Cadre, while the names of respondents other than respondent No. 1 (which is the Punjab Govt. ) were included in the list of School Cadre of P. E. S. (Class II) because those respondents were on that date working on the school and Inspection side. The Punjab Government started implementing the order dated 29th September 1961 long before that order was issued. The petitioners as well as the respondents (other than respondent No. 1, which is the Punjab Govt. ) were members of the P. E. S. (Class II) in the Punjab before its merger with Pepsu.
Finding of the Court:
The order about the bifurcation of the P. E. S. (Class II) service into school and college cadres and about the promotion of the respondents in preference to the petitioners is further stated to offend the mandatory provisions of class. (1) and (2) of Art. 16 of the Constitution, which read as under:- - (1) there shall be equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. (2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religions, rate, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them, be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect of, any employment or office under the State.
Issues: 1. Whether the order of the Punjab Government dated 29th September 1961 bifurcating the P. E. S. (Class II) into school and Collage Cadres is violative in whole or in part of the principle of preserving inter seniority embodied in rule 16 of the Punjab Services Integration Rule 1957? 2. Are the promotions to P. E. S. (Class I), in the wake of the aforesaid bifurcation of the respondents who were originally junior to the petitioners in the joint P. E. S. (Class II) list in preference to the petitioners on the sole ground of the nature of the said Rule and Article 16 of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The bifurcation of the P. E. S. (Class II) of the Punjab into School and College Cadres has had the effects of adversely disturbing the seniority of the petitioners, the preservation of which was guaranteed by R. 16. 2. The promotion of the respondents concerned to P. E. S. (Class I) in preference to the petitioners on the sole ground of the nature of vacancy, was the direct consequence of the bifurcation, which has been found to be violative of R. 16. As such the promotion of the respondents concerned in preference to the petitioners should be deemed to impinge upon the provisions of R. 16. 3. The promotions of the respondents concerned violate Cls. (1) and (2) of Art. 16 of the Constitution which have been reproduced in the earlier part of this judgment,. 4. The equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment of appointment to any office under the State is confined not only to the initial appointments but includes also the terms and conditions of service as well as promotion to selection posts, and the reason for that is obvious. It the equality of opportunity mentioned in Art. 16 was confined only to the initial appointments and not to subsequent promotions and conditions of service, the equality guaranteed by that Article would in actual practice in a large number of cases become illusory and lose all effectiveness, because after initial appointments as a result of differential treatment in the matter of promotions and conditions of service of various candidates selected at the same time, the object of securing fairplay in the services may be set at naught.
Final Decision: The petition is allowed and the impugned order is hereby quashed and it is directed that seniority be determined according to the law laid down by the Full Bench. No order as to costs.
H.R.Khanna, J.
1. In the present and seven connected petitions Nos. 1089, 1090, 1091, 1092, 1093, 1114 and 1115 of 1962 under Article 226 of the Constitutions of India the Division Bench, consisting of Mehar Singh J. and myself, referred the following two questions for decision obey a larger Bench:
"(1) Whether the order of the Punjab Government dated 29th September 1961 bifurcating the P. E. S. (Class II) into school and Collage Cadres is violative in whole or in part of the principle of preserving inter seniority embodied in rule 16 of the Punjab Services Integration Rule 1957?
(2) Are the promotions to P. E. S. (Class I), in the wake of the aforesaid bifurcation of the respondents who were originally junior to the petitioners in the joint P. E. S. (Class II) list in preference to the petitioners on the sole ground of the nature of the said Rule and Article 16 of the Constitution.
2. The petitioners filed these petitions on the allegations that there were two classes of gazetted officers in the Education Department in the Punjab before the merger of Pepsu and Punjab States. The P. E. S. (Class I) comprised all officers at the head quarters, Principals of Colleges, Professors and Divisional Inspectors of Schools. In P. E. S. (Class II) there were included all the senior Lecturers, Deputy and District Inspectors of Schools and those Headmasters who were holding gazetted posts. The normal rule of promotion from Class II to Class I was that senior-most person in Class II was promoted to Class I, and it made no difference whether, at the time he was promoted, he held the post either of a senior Lecturer or a post which had something to do with the Schools. The position was, however different in Pepsu State and there was in that State one cadre for Schools and another cadre for colleges in P. E. S. (Class II). When the question of merger of Pepsu with Punjab came up, one of the matters that needed determination was the seniority of the persons working in P. E. S. (Class I) and P. E. S. (Class II) in Punjab and Pepsu after their merger. On 29th September 1961 the Governor of Punjab ordered the bifurcation of the Punjab Educational Service (Class II) into two cadres, i. e., (1) College Cadre and (20 School and Inspection Cadre (hereinafter referred to as the School Cadre) with effect from 1st November, 1956, as per order reproduced below:
Punjab Government Education Department. Notification. Dated Chandigarh, the 29-9-1961. No. 7687-EDI-61/22306. The Governor of Punjab is pleased to order the bifurcation of the Punjab Educational Service (Class II) into two cadres, Viz. (1) College Cadre and (2) School and Inspection Cadre with effect from the 1st November 1956."
The method adopted for bifurcation was that if a person was working on 1st November 1956 on the School and Inspection side P. E. S. (Class II), he was placed in the School Cadre of P. E. S. (Class II), but if he was working on that date in a college he was placed in the college Cadre of P. E. S. (Class II). Separate lists of School cadre and College Cadre in P. E. S. (Class II) were, accordingly, prepared. The petitioners, who were the members of P. E. S. (Class II) and were working in colleges on 1st November 1956 were shown in College Cadre, while the names of respondent other than respondent No. I (which is the State of Punjab) in the various petitions were included in the list of School Cadre of P. E. S. (Class II) because those respondents were on that date working on the school and Inspection side. Actually the Punjab Government started implementing the order dated 29th September 1961 long before that order was issued. It may be added that the petitioners as well as the respondents (other than respondent No. 1, which is the Punjab Govt. ) were members of the P. E. S. (Class II) in the Punjab before its merger with Pepsu.
3. The name of Brij Lal Goswami petitioner in petition No. 1088 of 1962 was in order of seniority at No 35 in the joint seniority list of P.
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
