RAM LAL WADHWA & ANR. versus THE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

Citation: [1973] 1 S.C.R. 608 · Decided: 05-05-1972 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.M. SHELAT · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

608 
RAM LAL WADHWA & ANR. 
v. 
THE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. 
May 5,.1972 
(With connected Petition) 
[J. M. SHELAT, A. N. RAY, P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, D. G. 
PALEKAR, H. R. KHANNA, K. K. MATHEW AND 
M. H. BEG, JJ.] 
Comtitution of India, 1950-Articles 14 & 16-Equalily of opportu· 
nity in 11w.tters of promotion-Purljab Educational Service C.Provincialised 
Cadre) Class Ill Rules, 1961-Validity-Schools run by Local 
Bodies 
and teachers taken over by government in 1957-Teachers 
given same 
scales of pay as given to those in gvvernme,n't run 
schools-1961 Rules 
fornring separate and diminishing cadre for 
teachers of Local 
Bodies 
Schools taken over by government-Rules if discrin1inatory in matters of 
pron1otio11. 
The schools run by municipal boards and district boards in the then 
State of Punjab were taken over by the Punjab Government with effect 
from October l, 1957. 
The teachers then employed in these schools, 
thu> 
became 
State 
employees. 
These 
teachers 
called 
'pro· 
vincialised' 
teachers 
were 
to 
be 
given 
the 
same 
grades 
of pay 
and 
other 
allowances 
as were 
given 
to 
their 
counterparts 
in 
government employment. 
The teachers in government employment were 
governed by the Punjab Educational Service Class III School Cadre Rules, 
1955. On February 13, 1961, the Punjab government promulgateJ under 
article 309 of the Constitution, the Punjab Educational Service (Provin· 
cialised Cadre) Class III Rules, giving them retrospective effect 
from 
Oct. I, 1957. 
By these Rules the provincialised teachers were treated as 
falling under a Cadre separate and distinct from teachers in the State Cadre 
governed by the 1955 Rules. 
The 'provincialised' 
Cadre 
wcs to be a 
diminishing cadre to become extinct in course o'{ time. There was to be 
no furthei. recruitment to that cadre and all vacancies arising in that cadre 
\Vere to be replenished by direct recruitment to the State cadre. 
T'he 
transfer of such posts to the State cadre was to be done by splitting up 
such vacant posts into blocks of 7 and 6 by rotation. Consequently, the 
selection grade of 15 in the State cadre progressively increased in strength 
which was determined by the total cadre strength while the selection 
grade in the provincialised 
cadre progressively decreased. 
Thus those 
recruited to the State cadre had a progressively larger chance of getting 
into the selection grade. 
In State of P1111iab v. Joginder Singh. [,1963] 2 Supp. S.C,R. 169, this 
Court upheld the validity of the 1961 Rules against challenge under articles 
14 ond 16 of the Constitution. 
In the view of the majority the two 
cadrei started as independent services, they were never integrated into 
one •ervice and, therefore, the dissimilarity of the treatment by the Rules 
was not a denial of equal opportunity. But, the Punjab government never 
implemented the Rules at any time. 
On the reorganisation of the erst· 
while Punjab State into Punjab and Haryana on Nov. !, 1966, the Haryana 
government put the 1961 Rules into operation. 
The petitioners, appointed in the Local Bodies Schools before 'provin-
cialisation", challenged the validity of the 1961 Rules. Their compiaint was 
thJt the Rules created. without any valid justification, 
two cadres, the 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
R. L. WADHWA V. HARYANA (She/at, J,) 
609 
State cadre and the provincialised cadre, the former including not only 
the Government School teachers but also those recruited afte{ October 1, 
1957 and posted in the provincialised schools; that by reason of having 
two cadres and providing for both a uniform 15 % for selectiOll grade 
posts. coupled with making the provincialised cadre a diminishing one, the 
result has been that teachers deemed to have been appointed to the State 
cadre with effect from October 1, 1957 and even those recruited thereafter 
have been promoted to the Selection grade, while those in the provincia-
lised cadre, though senior in service and performed identical duties and 
had identical scales of pay, remained in the ordinary grade. According to 
the petitioners these Rules and their implementation contravened articles 
14 and 16 of the Constitution. 
The petitioners contended that the deci-
sion of this Court in Joginder Singh's case required reconsideration. 
HELD : (Per Shela!, Ray, Jaganmohan Reddy, Khanna and Mathew, 
JJ., Palekar and Beg, JJ. dissenting) dismissing the petition, 
( i) The majority decision in Joginder Singh's case doe

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.