HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 3861/2008 (OA No.1702/1996) Date of Decision: March 23, 2009 Pushpa Devi & Ors. ……. Petitioners Versus State of H.P.& Ors. ….. Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No For the petitioners : Mr. R. S. Gautam, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr.Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A.G. & Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. A.G. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) In the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following relief:- “(i) that the decision as contained in letter dated 31.8.1995 (Annexure A-8) whereby the category of Craft Teachers has been excluded from the C&V Cadre for being appointed against the posts of JBT teachers be quashed and set aside and declared as null and void. (ii) that the respondents be directed to consider the applicants being Craft Teachers category under C&V cadre of teachers for being appointed against the posts of JBT teachers in Distt. Bilaspur, H.P. (iii) that the respondents be directed to produce the entire record pertaining to the case of the applicants. (iv) that the respondents be burdened with the cost of this application.” Annexure A-8 is the letter dated 31.8.1995 conveying the decision of the Govt. that the teachers (B.Ed., Shastries, LTs, PETs and 2 Drawing Masters) be appointed on contract basis against the posts of JBTs. Separate District-wise panel of B.Ed. and C&V teachers (except Craft/music teachers) was to be prepared by inviting the names from the Employment Exchanges. 60% appointments were to be made amongst the B.Ed. teachers and 40% amongst the C&V teachers category. For consideration of the Himachal Pradesh Education Department Class III (School and Inspection Cadre) Services Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’), the posts of C&V teachers form a common cadre of D.M./Craft teachers/Hindi, Sanskrit, Urdu teachers/ Physical/Education teachers/ Band masters. It is the grievance of the petitioners that for filling up the posts of JBT teachers, the petitioners being a Craft teacher have been left out. The petitioners have been discriminated. Hence, Annexure A-8 is violative of Articles 14 & 16 and needs to be quashed. It is a settled law that it is a prerogative of the Government to fill up the posts, from the cadre which is best suited for the job. It is a policy decision and unless it is capricious, whimsical, arbitrary or illegal, the Court need not interfere with it. For the purposes of the Rules, no doubt the Craft teachers form a common cadre but however, the posts which are sought to be filled up are JBT teachers and that too on contractual basis. The Govt. has taken a conscious decision, as a temporary measure, to fill up the posts of trained JBT teachers through other category of teachers. The Govt. has restricted the category of teachers from which the appointments are to be made and a conscious decision has been taken to confine it only to Shastries, LTs, TGTs and Drawing Masters. The other categories, namely, Band Masters, S.V. teachers, Manual Trained Instructors and Craft teachers have been left out. In my considered view, these teachers form a 3 separate class amongst themselves and simply because the same category of teachers have been left out that by itself would not amount to violation of Articles 14 & 16. Noticeably, Shastries, Language Trained and Physical Trained Instructors form a different class as they are required to teach the main stream subjects to the students of the Schools. There is nothing wrong or irrational about the same. In any event, with the passage of time, the present petition has become infructuous. However, I have seen the contents of the letter dated 14.7.1996 (Annexure R-II), wherein the Government has taken a decision that if the posts in two Tribal Districts of Lahaul Spiti and Kinnaur are still left out, after considering the candidates from all other categories, all of the C&V teachers belonging to that District alone be considered for appointment on contractual basis. The petitioners admittedly do not belong to these tribal Districts. It is however, stated at the bar that large number of posts are still lying vacant and the petitioners are ready and willing to serve in these two tribal Districts. Hence, it is open for the petitioners to approach the State, offering their services for appointment in such tribal Districts on such terms and conditions as Govt. may determine. Considering the fact that there may be large number of vacancies in these two tribal Districts, the Govt. may sympathetically consider the petitioners’ case and fill-up the vacancies by appointing the petitioners on the said vacant posts in terms of its Policy and in accordance with Law.. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. March 23, 2009. (rana)