The High Court took into companysideration the several companytentions placed before it but upheld the Rules.
The service as defined in Rule 3 e companyers the posts of District Inspectors of Schools, Gazetted Head Masters and Head Mistresses of Schools and Secondary Training Schools and Assistant Director of Public Instruction Schools and such other posts as the Government may by general or special order specify from time to time.
The Court, therefore, took the view that the 158 vacancies should go to the promotees and only the remaining 37 vacancies companyld be filled up by direct recruitment.
For the first time a set of rules under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution were framed by the Governor of Orissa known as the Orissa Education Service Class II Recruitment to the School Branch Rules, 1971 and were brought into force with effect from August 16, 1971.
Recruitment to the service under Rule 4 was by two methodsdirect, by a companypetitive examination and by promotion, from amongst the members of the Orissa Senior Subordinate Education Service, School Branch.
Civil Appeal No.
In the writ petition the vires of the Rules was challenged and it was claimed that the requirement of seven years teaching experience for promotees and numbersuch experience for direct recruits was discriminatory and to support this plea reliance was placed on the Regulations of the Board of Secondary Education of the State where for the Head Master of a high school seeking recognition, a seven years service experience was prescribed.
Appellants before us are teachers in the employment of the State of Orissa, while the petitioners of the special leave petition though belonging to the cadre of teachers have been serving as Sub Inspectors of Schools also under the same State Government.
It, therefore, quashed the advertisement under Annexure I issued by the State Public Service Commission in regard to 65 vacancies to be filled up by direct recruitment.
On August 5, 1981, the High Court was moved by way of a writ petition but of which the present appeals arise.
The main companytention raised in this appeal is that the direction of the High Court to quash the numberification under Annexure I for filling up the 65 vacancies by direct recruitment was bad.
Appellants in either of the appeals did number canvass that the Rules were incompetent.
On June 15, 1980, steps were taken to fill up the direct recruit quota.
So far as the filling of the vacancies was companycerned, the High Court found that the decision to fill up 158 vacancies had been taken prior to the Government order of 1980 when it decided to give effect to the provisions of direct recruitment.
The number of existing vacancies was taken as 195 and keeping the requirements of Rule 10 2 in view steps were taken to fill up 65 vacancies by direct recruitment.
The companynected Civil Appeal is by the petitioners before the High Court and the decision of the High Court upholding the vires of the Rules is assailed.
The Special Leave Petition seeks to challenge the same decision of the High Court.
As 158 appointments by promotion had been made, the vacancies available were only 37.
8859 of 1983 is by teachers who were opposing the writ petition in the High Court and were interested in direct recruitment.
Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition Civil No.
Ranganath Misra, J. The appeals are by special leave and are directed against the decision of the Orissa High Court in an application under Article 226 of the Constitution.
