- (1.) By means of the present appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent the appellants who are either teachers in Government Educational Institutions or holding equivalent posts in the Education Department, in the Punjab, seek to impugn the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court, rendered in Civil Writ Petition No. 2335 of 1972 which was filed at the instance of the appellants. The parties who had to face the onslaught both in the Writ Petition as also in the present appeal are the State Government, the Director of Public Instruction, Punjab and eleven other respondents who are functioning as Principals of various Government Educational Institutions. Two of them are, however, working on the equivalent posts in the Education Department.
(2.) In order to appreciate the controversy the facts may be succinctly noticed. The appellants joined Government service as Masters in the Punjab Subordinate Educational Service and at that time their service conditions were governed by the Punjab Subordinate Educational Service Rules 1937 (hereinafter referred to as the 1937 Rules). These Rules were, however, replaced by the Punjab Educational Service Class III (School Cadre) Rules, 1955 which came into force on being promulgated on May 30, 1951 (reference to these Rules shall hereinafter be made as the 1955 Rules). There is no dispute that the appellants are now governed by these Rules in the matter of their service. At this stage the contesting respondents (other than the official respondents) may also be identified in regard to their status. Prior to July 1957 there existed certain Local Bodies Schools having teaching staff. With a view to ameliorate the service conditions of the staff working in these schools and to confer benefit of full service on them, the Government decided to provincialise all such schools. A communication was issued by the Government on July 19, 1957 intimating the respective Deputy Commissioners that the Government had decided to provincialise the schools run by those Bodies with effect from October 1, 1957 and that the Local Bodies be informed not to open any new school, appoint any new teacher or upgrade the standard of any school after July 1, 1957. In pursuance to this communication all Local Bodies Schools in the State stood provincialised with effect from October 1, 1957. It transpires that no specific Rules pertaining to the service conditions of the teachers and other members of the staff of the provincialised schools were framed for about three and a half years. However, on February 13, 1961 the Punjab Educational Service (Provincialised Cadre) Class III Rules 1961 (to be referred to as the 1961 Rules) were promulgated with a provision that these Rules shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from the date of provincialication of schools, i.e. October 1. 1957. Respondents Nos. 3 to 13 are Masters who are admittedly governed by the 1061 Rules.
(3.) Another Class of service in the Education Department is the Punjab Education Service Class II whose conditions of service are dictated by separate Rules enacted in 1934, known as the Punjab Education Service (Class II) Rules 1934 which came into force with effect from January 1, 1935 (hereinafter referred to as the Class II Rules). Rule 6 thereof makes a provision in regard to the method and sources of recruitment to the Class II Service. The relevant sub-clause (a) prescribes one of these methods, i.e. by selection from the Subordinate Educational Service . It is the words underlined which have provoked an unnecessary and avoidable controversy. According to the interpretation placed on these words by the appellants, they alone can be deemed to fall under the Subordinate Educational Service, the argument being that at the time of the promulgation of the Class II Rules it was only the service of the appellants which was in existence, the Provincialised Cadre having come into existence only with effect from October 1, 1957. The occasion for the controversy arose when thirty-three posts fell vacant in the Punjab Educational Service Class II. According to the stand taken by the official respondents, with a view to ensure promotions of the two categories of teachers on rational basis, the State Government decided in March 1966 that the vacancies falling in the Promotion Quota in the Class II Service, from the Subordinate Educational Services would be filled from amongst the State Cadre and Provincialised Cadre in the ratio of 2:1. In consequence of this decision the thirty- three vacancies were filled by promoting twenty-two officers from the State Cadre, to which the appellants belonged and the remaining eleven vacancies were filled from the Provincialised Cadre. The appellants claimed that even the eleven vacancies utilised by the Provincialised Cadre should be made available to them as the Class II Rules did not contemplate promotions from the Provincialised Cadre. Their contentions did not meet favour with the learned single Judge and the Writ Petition filed on their behalf was dismissed.;