STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. versus SHANTILAL ETC.

Citation: [1989] 3 S.C.R. 670 · Decided: 02-08-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. 
v. 
SHANTILAL ETC. 
AUGUST 2, 1989 
B 
[K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY AND KULDIP SINGH, JJ.] 
Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, ' Y 
1965: Creation of two cadres-Nursing Cadre (Nursing Superintendent 
Grade J/Grade II, Assistant Nursing Superintendent, Nursing Tutor) 
and Compounder Cadre (Compounder Grade I/Grade Il/Grade lll)-
C Whether valid and legal. 
.) 
Bansi Lal Sharma, respondent in one appeal, was appointed as 
Male Nurse in 1941 and was officiating as Sister Tutor in March 1966 
when the Rajasthan Medical and Health subordinate Service Rules, 
1965 came into force. Shanti Lal Jain, respondent in the second appeal, 
D was appointed as Compounder Grade I in the year 1959 and was hold· 
ing the post of Sister Tutor in March 1966. In their separate petitions 
filed in the Rajasthan High Court, the respondents challenged the crea· 
lion of two separate cadres-Nursing Cadre and Compounders 
Cadre-under the Rules as arbitrary and as such violative of Articles 
14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It was pleaded that hitherto 
E there was CO!Dbined channel of promotion for compounders and nurses 
but the Rules bad arbitrarily deprived Compounders Grade I of their 
right to promotion to higher posts of Assistant Nursing Superintendent 
and Nursing Superintendent Grade II/Grade I. It was further urged 
that recruitment to the Nursing Cadre was confmed to females alone 
which resulted in discrimination on the ground of sex. 
-4. 
)"· 
The writ petitions were dismissed by the learned Single Judges .J 
who held that creation of two separate cadres was not arbitrary, did not 
1 
F 
G 
H 
infringe the equality clause, and was not discriminatory on the ground 
of sex. 
0The Division Bench, on appeal, upheld the fmdings of the 
learned Single Jndges on Article 5 but set aside their judgments and 
found that there was no justification for creating separate cadres and 
denying channel of promotion to Compounders Grade I to tbe higher 
posts in the Nursing Cadre. The Division Bench accordingly held the 
Roles to be arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the • 
Constitution .. 
Allowing the appeals filed by the State, this Court, 
670 
'
)-
~
I· 
! v 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN v. SHANTILAL 
671 
HELD: I. Prior to 1966 there was no statutory Rules pertaining A 
to the service. No executive order creating cadres in the department or 
a joint seniority list indicating common cadre for nurses and com-
pounders have been produced. [673F] 
2. Even assuming that prior to coming into force of the Rules 
B 
there was a combined cadre of nurses and compounders, Articles 14 
and 16 of the Constitution do not forbid the State Government from 
creating new cadres, bifurcating one cadre into two or more, or 
uniting two or more cadres into one. Tlfe creation of cadres in the 
service of the State is a matter which has to he left entirely to the 
State Government. [673G-H] 
Reserve Bank of India v. N.C. Paliwal & Ors., [1977] I S.C.R. 
377; referred to. 
3. A bare reading of the Rules show that the composition of the 
c 
two cadres including designations, qualifications and methods of ap-
pointment to various posts, Is entirely different. This Court does not 
D 
agree with the High Court'that Nurses and Compouuders belong to one 
class and as such must he encadred together. [678B] 
4. It is not for the High Court to assume the extent of maternity 
cases which are .treated in the hospitals or to lay-down that com-
pounders though not qualified to treat maternity cases must he equated 
E 
. 
. 
with nurses because they can treat other type of cases. [678G] 
5. By amending the Rules in 1978 an opening has been provided 
for compounders Grade II to enter the Nursing cadre by competing 
with the staff nurses for promotion to the post of Sister/Nursing Tutor. 
The Compounders Grade II have thus been provided with two channels 
F 
of promotion, one in their own cadre and the other to the Nursing 
Cadre. Thus the grievance of the Compounders that they were denied 
channel of promotion to the higher posts in Nursing Cadre has also been 
removed, [679B-C] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 
G 
6147-6148 of 1983. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 17 .1.83 of the Rajasthan 
High Court in D.B. Spl. Appeal No. 43 of 1978 & D.B.S.A. No. 14 of 
1975. 
B.D. Sharma for the Appellants. 
H 
A 
672 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[ 1989] 3 S.C.R. 
Dalveer Bhandari, K.R.R. Pillai, Surya Kant, P.T. Mathur

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