IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP(T) No.5978 of 2008. Date of Decision: 11th August, 2010. Meena Kumari and others …Petitioners. Versus. State of H.P. and another …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting? No For the Petitioner(s): Mr.Surinder Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent(s): Mr.Vivek Singh Thakur, Addl.A.G. Deepak Gupta, J.(oral) The Petitioners by means of this writ petition have prayed for the grant of the following amongst other reliefs: “(a)Quash the impugned part of the order (A-1) to the extent it excludes the category of the Craft Teachers for being appointed to the posts of JBTs by applying principle of severability as the same has been issued arbitrarily, malafidely and illegally by the respondents.” Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioners are trained Craft teachers. They first obtained their one year diploma in Cutting and Tailoring. Thereafter, they completed one year Embroidery course from ITI Solan and after these two years training they did one year advanced course of training as Craft Instructor in the trade of Embroidery at the Central Training Institute, Chandigarh. It is not disputed that craft teachers are included in the cadre of C&V (Classical & Vernacular) Teachers. A decision was taken by the Government on 31.8.1985 that a 2 large number of trained B.Ed. teachers and C&V teachers are available within the State in all Districts. So it has been decided that these teachers (B.Ed. Shastries, LTs, PET and Drawing Masters) shall be appointed on contract basis against the posts of JBTs. For this purpose, separate district-wise panels were drawn up. However, the category of craft/music teachers were excluded from the zone of consideration. Aggrieved by this, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition. The main contention raised by Shri Surinder Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have been discriminated for no fault on their part. He submits that the petitioners fall in the category of C&V cadre and therefore they cannot be excluded. He also submits that in the third year of training the petitioners had undertaken training for teaching junior and small children and therefore, also the discrimination is arbitrary. There is no doubt that the petitioners fall in the same category as other C&V teachers. They have not been made eligible for being appointed as JBT teachers. The question, which arises is whether the State was justified in making such classification. If the classification is made on rationale basis and the said classification has reasonable nexus with the object to be achieved the same would be valid. The stand of the State is that the Craft teachers form a different category. It is true that they are part of C&V cadre but they have been specifically excluded while issuing Annexure A-1 with the petition. A conscious decision was taken by the Government to exclude these teachers. According to the State 3 the rationale is that JBT teachers are meant to teach junior classes i.e. up to class 5th. According to the Sate, Craft teachers like the petitioners and Music teachers are not required to teach in primary schools since neither embroidery nor cutting and music is taught at this stage. Sh.Surinder Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that the trained nursery teachers have also been included and given the benefit of being appointed against the JBT posts. There is nothing wrong with this action since nursery teachers are obviously trained to teach the small children. Therefore, in my view the classification made by the State is reasonable, made on rationale basis and has a reasonable nexus with the object sought to be achieved which was to fill up the vacant posts of JBT teachers in primary schools. It cannot be said that there is any arbitrariness in this decision. As such there is no merit in this petition which is dismissed. However, the State may consider whether the petitioners and other persons trained like them can be considered for appointment on contract basis on those schools where such subjects are being taught. There will be no order as to costs. August 11, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) PV Judge.