they had all been companyfirmed in the head masters posts before 1961.
1 2 in w.p.
these interviews were held from march to july 1971.
they alleged that the selection by interview was a farce the device being adopted to manipulate the selections in such a way that the old communal proportion was maintained.
since the above interviews had taken place after the application of the above named reservation rules the departmental promotion companymittee took these rules into consideration in making the selections.
in the case of respondents 3 to 34 number only were they promoted prior to 1958 but except for respondents 26.
writ petitions 359 and 360/1971 were filed after the inter views were over and selections made by the companymittee.
175 359 and 360 of 1971.
as a preliminary to the same the state reverted by an order dated 23 2 1971.
the respondents 3 to 325 are the teachers who had been selected at the interview.
they alleged that while they were promptly reverted respondents 3 to 34 who were all junior to petitioner number 1 and also to some of the other petitioners had number been so reverted number were they asked to appear for the interview.
this was filed by 13 kashmiri pandit teachers in a representative capacity on behalf of 400 other kashmiri pandits who bad boycotted the interviews on the ground that the interviews were bound to be a fraud.
1 and 2 in w. p. number.
similar allega tions were made in the other petition namely writ petition 360/ 71.
the petitioners had to wait their turn in the 10 seats earmarked for kashmiri pandits and others and therefore although they were seniors in the grade of teachers their chance of appointment as head masters came much later.
k. sen naunit lal and i. n. shroff for the petitioners in all the petitions v. gupte o. c. mathur p. c. bhartari and bhuvanesh kumari for respondents number.
therefore they claimed the petitioners should be either restored to their former posts or the respondents should be reverted like them in which case alone all of them companyld be regarded as having been equally treated.
petitioner number 1 was appointed as an officiating head master in 1960.
some of the respondents were further promoted as principals and district education officers which was a grade higher than that of head masters.
but before the interviews were over the first of the writ petitions before us namely writ petition 175/71 was filed by 7 kashmiri pandit teachers who had been affected by the order reverting them on 23 3 1971.
this order was passed by the companyrt on april 23 1968.
27 and 30.
the petitioners in writ petition number 359/71 are 37 in number and all of them belong to the jammu region.
respondents 3 to 295 are some of the teachers selected for appointment to the higher posts by promotion the grievance of the petitioners was that although they were seniors and had officiated as head masters for a number of years they had been deliberately dropped to make room for the respondents who were very much junior to them.
in other words the companyplaint of the petitioners was that the alleged selection after interview was number a genuine selection but a fraud.
number 175 the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by palekar j. these three petitions under article 32 are a sequel to the action taken by the state of jammu kashmir in pursuance of the order passed by this companyrt in makhanlal waza ors.
original jurisdiction writ petitions number.
they further alleged that a large number of posts was claimed to have been reserved tinder the rules for backward classes but the whole exercise was merely to secure about 90 of the posts to muslims.
they all officiated as head masters till 1971 when they were reverted.
the net result of the recommendations of the committee as accepted by the state was to make reservations in appointments and promotions to the extent of 8 of the posts for scheduled castes and 42 in favour of the backward classes.
petitioners 2 and 3 in 1962 and petitioners 4 to 7 in 1964.
they were senior teachers who were officiating as head masters being appointed between 1960 and 1964 and had number been directly affected by the two writ petitions already referred to.
v. state of jammu kashmir ors.
they justified their refusal to appear for the interview on the ground that respondents had been exempted from the interview and continued in their former posts.
this order was passed on february 23 1971.
175 and 359 c. mathur p. c. bhartari and bhuvanesh kumari for res pondents number.
