http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 9  

PETITIONER: B.K. MOHAPATRA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF ORlSSA

DATE OF JUDGMENT28/10/1987

BENCH: VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) BENCH: VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) SINGH, K.N. (J)

CITATION:  1988 AIR   24            1988 SCR  (1) 650  1987 SCC  Supl.  553     JT 1987 (4)   170  1987 SCALE  (2)880

ACT:      Teacher’s  service  matter-Rationalisation  scheme  for integration of  services of  teachers in  different types of schools-Dispute  regarding   terms   thereof   relating   to seniority and contributory Provident Fund. Act of State.

HEADNOTE: %      A number  of the  princely States,  situated within the territories of the present State of Orissa, were merged with effect from  January 1, 1948, with the Province of orissa as it then existed. On such merger, the High Schools within the said princely  States came  under the  juries diction of the Province of  Orissa. The Schools belonged to two categories- ’A’  type  schools  which  were  full-fledged  High  schools sending candidates for the Matriculation examination and ‘B’ type schools  which were  incomplete  schools,  not  sending candidates for  the Matriculation  examination. On  the said schools being  taken over  by the  Province  of  orissa  the teachers of  the schools  came  under  the  control  of  the Government of  orissa. The orissa Government issued a letter dated 5.1.1949  to the  Director of  Public  Instruction  in connection with the subject of regulation of the services of the teachers.      The appellant  was an  assistant teacher  in one of the ’B’ type  schools on  June 15, 1q953, after the commencement of the  Constitution of India, and continued to work as such in the  ’B’ type  school till August 1, 1964, when the State Government of  Orissa published a rationalisation scheme for integrating the  services of  the teachers  in the different types of  High Schools  in the State. Aggrieved by the terms of the  Scheme relating to (i) the seniority of the teachers working  in   the  ’B’  type  High  Schools  and  (ii).  The contributory Provident  Fund, the  appellant  filed  a  writ petition in  the High  Court.  The  High  Court  upheld  the validity of  the Scheme  and dismissed  the Petition,  while recommending, however, to the Government to modify the terms relating to  the Provident  Fund Scheme  applicable  to  the teachers of  ’B’ type High Schools. The appellant then moved this Court by special leave against the decision of the High Court.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 9  

    Disposing of the appeal, the Court, 651 ^      HELD: It  is true  that till  the commencement  of  the Constitution of  India, the  position of  the ’B’  type High Schools and the teachers working in them was being regulated in accordance  with the  terms contained  in the order dated 5.1.1949. But  on the  commencement of  the Constitution  of India, all  the territories  which  immediately  before  the commencement of  the Constitution  were either  comprised in the Province  of Orissa  or were  being administrated  as if they formed  part of  that Province,  became and constituted the  State   of  Orissa.  The  State  Government  was  under obligation to discharge its executive functions with respect to education  in respect  of all  the schools  including ’B’ type High  Schools. A  High school  which once belonged to a princely state  became a  Government High School with effect from the  commencement of  the Constitution and it could not be anything  else and  the teachers  working therein  became teachers holding  posts under  the Government.  It is  well- settled that  the doctrine  of an  "act of  State" cannot be pleaded by a State as a defence against its own citizens. An ’act of  State’ is an act done in relation to a foreigner by a Sovereign  power of  a country.  Such  an  act  cannot  be questioned in  any court  of law, but such a situation would not arise  between the  State Government  and a citizen like the appellant  who joined  service after the commencement of the Constitution.  The High  Court was in error in upholding the  plea  that  the  order  dated  5.1.1949  could  not  be questioned by the appellant who had joined service after the commencement of the institution. [657A-E. GH; 658A]      There is  also no  rational basis  for refusing to give the benefit  of the service rendered by a teacher working in a ’B’  type High  school after  January 26, 1950, either for purposes of  seniority or  for  purposes  of  computing  the retirement benefits. It may be open to the State Government, while  integrating  the  services  of  teachers  working  in different kinds  of institutions,  to introduce  a scheme of rationalisation which  may have  the effect of modifying the conditions of  service of  different  groups  of  government servants. But  the Government  cannot by a stroke of pendeny the benefit of the entire past service rendered by one group of such  government servants.  The effect  of the government scheme was  that all the teachers who had been in Government Schools immediately  prior  to  June  1  1964  the  date  of coversion of  the High  Schools to government schools-became senior to the teachers working in the ’B’ type High Schools, Ex-District Board  High Schools  and Ex-Anchal High Schools. The scheme  appears to  be an irrational one. The High Court was in  error in upholding the terms of the scheme in so far as the question of the seniority was concerned. The judgment of the High Court. in so far as the validity of the terms of the scheme, pertaining to 652 seniority of  the teachers in the schools referred to in it, is concerned,  is reversed.  the clause  in the scheme which reads: "But  for the purpose of reckoning their seniority in Government service  their services  will be counted from the date of  conversion of  the schools into Government schools" is void.  The State  government is directed to treat, on and after January,  26, 1950, the service of the teachers of the ’B’ type  High schools,  ex-District Board  High Schools and ex-Anchal High  Schools  as  the  service  under  the  State Government. It  is open  to the State Government to evolve a reasonable formula  for  integrating  the  cadres  of  these

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 9  

teachers with the cadres of the teachers in the High Schools which have  been under  the  Government  all  along.  Before bringing about  such  an  integration,  the  government  may formulate reasonable  principles for  equating the  posts in the Government  High Schools  with the posts in the ’B’ type High Schools,  ex-District Board  High Schools and ex-Anchal High Schools  having regard to the minimum qualification for the posts,  pay, responsibilities,  etc. In the light of the said principles,  the government  shall prepare  a seniority list, whereafter  it shall proceed to make promotions of the teachers to  the higher cadre. In view of the stand taken by counsel for  the appellant  and other  teachers in  ’B’ type High schools,  ex-District Board  High Schools  and the  ex- Anchal High  schools, regarding  their  not  insisting  upon promotions  with   retrospective  effect,  etc.,  the  State government shall  promote these teachers to the higher posts as and  when the  vacancies arise hereafter, on the basis of their rank  in the seniority list, if they are found fit for such promotion. The government is at liberty, if it finds it convenient, to treat, as submitted by the teachers’ counsel, the two  groups of  teachers as belonging to separate cadres and reserve  certain percentage of posts for being filled up only by  the teachers  of ’B’ type High Schools, ex-District Board High  Schools and  ex-Anchal High  schools, as was the case in  State of  Punjab v. Joginder Singh, [1963 (Supp. 2) SCR 169].  The order  of the  High Court  is modified to the above extent  and the  State Government  shall  prepare  the seniority list  and make  promotions accordingly  within six months in  the light  of the  above  observations.  [659C-G; 660C-H; 661A-D]      No opinion is expressed on the question of Contributory Provident Fund  Scheme, the  same having been satisfactorily settled by the state. [661D-E]      Johnstone v. Pedlar, [1921] 2 A.C. 262, referred to.

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil  Appeal No. 661 of 1971. 653      From the  Judgment and  order dated  28.10.1969 of  the Orissa High Court in O.J.C. No. 165 of 1966.      S.P. Pandey for the Appellant.      G.S. Chatterjee for Respondent No. 1.      R.K. Garg and J.R. Dass for Respondent No. 2.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      VENKATARAMIAH, J. With effect from 1.1.1948 a number of princely States  which were  situated within the territories of the present State of Orissa were merged with the Province of Orissa  as it  then existed.  On  such  merger  the  High Schools within  the said princely States also came under the jurisdiction of  the  Province  of  Orissa.  The  said  High Schools belonged  to two  categories-namely ’A’ type schools which were  full-fledged High  Schools which  were  actually sending candidates for the matriculation examination and ’B’ type schools  which  were  incomplete  schools  not  sending candidates for  the matriculation  examination. On  the said High Schools being taken over by the Province of Orissa, the teachers serving  in the  said High  Schools came  under the control  of   the  Government  of  Orissa.  It  then  became necessary to  make an  order to regulate the services of the said teachers.  The Government  of Orissa  in the  Education Department issued a letter dated 5.1.1949 to the Director of Public Instruction  on the  subject.  The  relevant  pertion

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 9  

thereof is extracted below:-                "In the  States the  High Schools  other than           those at  District  Headquarters  mentioned  above           will be  of two  types. The  complete High Schools           will be  ’A’ type  High Schools and the incomplete           High Schools ’B’ type High Schools.                The ’A’  type  schools  will  be  similar  to           Government  High   Schools  other  than  those  at           District Headquarters.  The services  of the staff           of such  High  Schools  will  be  pensionable  and           transferable and  the teachers  will get  pay  and           dearness allowances  at the  rates prescribed  for           Government  servants.  Government  will  bear  the           whole of the recurring and non-recurring costs.                ’B’ type  High  Schools  will  be  Government           managed. 654           The staff  will get  pay and  allowances at  rates           prescribed   for    Government    servants.    The           Headmasters of  those schools will be in the upper           division of  the  S.E.S.  The  services  of  those           teachers will  not be  pensionable. They will have           the benefits of the Contributory Provident Fund to           which Government  will contribute  at the  rate of           Re. 1  in the  rupee of  the  salary.  As  regards           recurring expenses  of  those  schools  Government           will meet the difference between the standard cost           and   income    from   fees    and   other   local           subscriptions.    As     regards     non-recurring           expenditure Government will meet two-thirds of the           cost.                The standard cost for the ’B’ type Government           managed High Schools will consist of the following           items:-                (a)..........................................                (b) The  total contribution on Provident Fund           deposited at  the rate  of Re.-/ 1/- in the rupee,           and                (c)..........................................                The Inspector of Schools will be the managing           agent  on   behalf  of   the  Government  and  the           Headmaster will be the correspondent of a ’B’ type           Government managed High School.      The appellant  was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on a pay of Rs.70 per month in the pay scale of Rs.70- 140 plus admissible dearness  allowance in  one of  the ’B’ type High Schools by  the Inspector  of Schools on 15.6.1953 after the commencement of  the Constitution  of India. He continued to work as  an Assistant Teacher in one or the other of the ’B’ type High  Schools to  which he was transferred until August 1,   1964    when   the   State   Government   published   a rationalisation scheme  for integrating  the services of the teachers in  different types of High Schools in the State of Orissa, namely,  Zilla Schools,  ’A’  type  Government  High Schools, ’B’  type  High  Schools,  Ex-District  Board  High Schools and  Ex-Anchal High Schools hereinafter collectively referred to as integrated High Schools. The relevant part of the scheme reads thus:-"No. 18027-E Government of Orissa           Education Department Resolution           1st Aug., 1964           Sub:-Rationalisation of High                Schools in the State. 655                Government have  under their  own  management           quite  a  few  types  of  High  Schools  in  which

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 9  

         conditions  of   service  of  the  employees  vary           category to  category. This  ununiformity  in  the           patterns and  in the conditions of service has not           only evoked  public  criticism  but  also  created           certain administrative  difficulties and  tends to           lowering of  standards in  the institutions. It is           for these  reasons that  Government had  for  some           time past  under their  consideration the question           of  rationalisation  of  the  following  different           types of High Schools in the State whose number is           noted against each.           1. Zilla Schools                   -18           2. ’A’ type Govt. High School.     -52           3. ’B’ type High Schools           -22           4. Ex-District Board High Schools. -17           5. Ex-Anchal High Schools.         - 6                After careful  consideration Government  have           now decided  that the  five types  of High Schools           mentioned above  should be converted into a single           type of  Govt. School  with effect  from 1st June,           1964.                Since the  employees of  the  ’B’  type  High           Schools are  in receipt  of pay  and allowances on           the scales  applicable to  Government servants the           question of  fixation of  their pay and allowances           does not  arise. They  will continue to draw their           salary that  they  are  drawing  on  the  date  of           conversion.                In respect of the incumbents of ’B’ type High           Schools  who  are  governed  by  the  contributory           provident fund rules, their subscriptions, if any,           in  the   fund  together   with   the   Government           contribution on  the date of conversion may either           be refunded  to them or be credited to the General           Provident  Fund   account  to   be  opened  afresh           according to  their option  and all  the employees           may be  brought under the Orissa General Provident           Fund Rules.  After conversion Government shall not           contribute   anything   towards   the   Employees’           Contributory Provident  Fund. All the employees of           ’B’ type  High Schools  will be  brought  over  to           pensionable service from the date of conversion of           the schools into Government Schools.           .................................................. 656                The seniority  of the  ’B’ type,  Ex-District           Board and  Ex-Anchal Schools  as among  themselves           will be  determined by  their length of continuous           service in  their respective  cadres  in  the  old           Schools. But  for the  purpose of  reckoning their           seniority in  Government service,  their  services           will be counted from the date of conversion of the           Schools into Government school......... "                                              (Underlining by us)      Aggrieved by  the terms  of the  rationalisation scheme referred to above relating to (i) the Contributory Provident Fund and  (ii) the seniority of teachers who were working in ’B’ type  High Schools,  the appellant filed a writ petition in the  High Court  of Orissa questioning the discriminatory treatment meted  out to  him and  other teachers in ’B’ type High Schools.  The appellants  contended that even though he had been  appointed in  a ’B’  type High School he should be treated as  having  entered  the  service  under  the  State Government  on   15.6.1953  when  he  was  appointed  as  an

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 9  

Assistant Teacher in a ’B’ type High School, that the clause in the scheme of 1964 which provided that for the purpose of reckoning seniority  in Government  service the  services of teachers in  ’B’ type High Schools would be counted from the date of  conversion of  the schools  into Government schools which had  the effect  of wiping of the previous service put in by  them in  the said schools was discriminatory and that the terms  relating to  the Contributory Provident Fund were invalid. The  petition was  resisted by the State Government pleading inter  alia that  the decision  of  the  Government dated 5.1.1949  being an ’act of State’ its effect could not be challenged  by the  appellant even  though he had entered service in the year 1953. The High Court upheld the validity of the  scheme and dismissed the writ petition. It, however, recommended to  the Government  to modify the terms relating to the  Provident Fund  scheme applicable to the teachers of ’B’ type High Schools. Aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, the appellant has filed this appeal by special      It is  urged on  behalf of the appellant that the State Government   was wrong in treating him as having entered the service under  the State  Government only  from June 1, 1964 although he  had been  appointed by the Inspector of Schools in the  year 1953.  It is  argued that  merely  because  the appellant was appointed in a ’B’ type High School which once belonged to  a princely  State he  could not  be denied  the benefits available  to  all  other  teachers  in  Government service. It  is further  submitted  that  the  case  of  the Government that the Government was 657 running ’B’ schools as merely agents was wholly untenable.      It is no doubt true that the ’B’ type High Schools were formerly in  the princely  States and  that on the merger of the States  the then  Government of  the Province  of Orissa passed an  order on  5.1.1949 stating that the ’B’ type High Schools would  be governed  and managed  by the Inspector of Schools on  behalf of  the Government  and  the  Headmasters would be  the correspondents  of ’B’ type Government managed High Schools.  It is also true that till the commencement of the Constitution  of India  the position  of ’B’  type  High Schools  and   the  teachers  working  in  them  were  being regulated in  accordance with  the terms  contained  in  the order  dated  5.1.1949.  But  on  the  commencement  of  the Constitution of  India all the territories which immediately before the  commencement of  the  Constitution  were  either comprised  in   the  Province   of  Orissa   or  were  being administered as  if they formed part of that Province became and constituted  the State  of Orissa  (vide Entry No. 10 in the First  Schedule to the Constitution of India.) The State Government  was   under  an   obligation  to  discharge  its executive functions  with respect  to education by virtue of Entry 11  of the  Seventh Schedule to the Constitution as it then existed  in respect  of all  the schools  including ’B’ type schools.  A High  School which  once  belonged  to  the princely states  became a Government High School with effect from the  commencement of  the Constitution and it could not be anything  else. The  Inspector of Schools could no longer function as  the managing  agent  on  behalf  of  the  State Government and the ’B’ type High School could no longer be a ’Government  managed  High  School’.  The  teachers  working therein became  teachers holding  posts under the Government since there  was no other authority which owned the ’B’ type High Schools  after January  26, 1950  because there were no territories within  the  State  of  Orissa  which  could  be considered as  territories administered by the Government as if they  formed a part of the State which was the case until

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 9  

January 26, 1950. Though the princely States were subject to the paramountcy  of the  British Crown, they were considered to be  foreign States  by the  British Indian Provinces. Any action taken  in respect  of them  or their  subjects by the British Indian  Provinces was an act of State but its effect could not  be extended beyond January 26, 1950 because after that date  there was  no longer  any foreign Government. The princely States  had gone  out of  existence.  It  is  well- settled that  the doctrine  of an  ’act of  State’ cannot be pleaded by a State as a defence against its own citizens. An ’act of  State’ is an act done in relation to a foreigner by the sovereign  power  of  a  country  or  its  agent  either previously authorised  or subsequently ratified. Such an act cannot be questioned or made the subject of legal 658 proceedings in  any Court of law. But such a situation would not arise  A between the State Government and a citizen like the appellant  who joined  service after the commencement of the Constitution.      It is  appropriate to refer here to the decision of the House of  Lords in Johnstone v. Pedlar, [1921] 2 A.C. 262 in which  the   nature  of   an  ’act   of  State’   arose  for consideration. Lord Atkinson observed at pages 278-279 thus:                "The best  definition, I  think, of an act of           State,  as   well  as   the  descriptions  of  the           consequences flowing from it, is that given in the           judgment  of   Lord  Kingsdown   in  the  case  of           Secretary of  State for  India  v.  Kamachee  Boye           Sahaba. (13 Moo. P.C. 22). In that case, the Rajah           of Tanjore,  a native  independent sovereign,  who           was, by  virtue of  certain  treaties,  under  the           protection of  the East India Company, in exercise           of their  sovereign power  and in  trust  for  the           British Government,  seized the Raj of Tanjore and           the whole  property of  the deceased  Rajah as  an           escheat, on the ground that the dignity of the Raj           was extinct for want of a male heir, and that this           property lapsed  to the British Government. It was           held first,  as it  was held  in Buron  v.  Denman           (2Ex. 167),  that an  act done  by an agent of the           Government, though  in excess of his authority, on           being ratified  and adopted by the Government, was           of the same authority as if it had originally been           directed by the Government, that the effect of the           ratification is,  in the  language of  Parke B. In           Buron v.  Denman (Ibid. 188-9), this, that it only           leaves a remedy against the Crown (such as it is),           and exempts  from all  liability  the  person  who           commits  the   trespass,  and,  second,  that  the           seizure made by the British Government acting as a           sovereign power  through its  delegate,  the  East           India Company, was an act of State to inquire into           the propriety  of which  a municipal  Court had no           jurisdiction. Lord  Kingsdown, in  delivering  the           judgement of  the Privy Council said (13 Moo. P.C.           77, 86);  "Acts done  in the  execution  of  these           sovereign powers  were not  subject to the control           of the  municipal courts, either of India or Great           Britain."      In the  same decision  Lord Phillimore said at page 295 thus;                "The defence  set up  in the  present case is           sometimes 659           called the  defence of an act of State. As regards

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 9  

         this way of looking at it, I cannot put the matter           better or  more tersely  than as I found it put in           one  of   the  reasons  given  by  the  successful           plaintiffs in their case as respondents before the           Privy Council,  in Walker  v. Baird,  [1892-  A.C.           491, 494): "Because between Her Majesty and one of           her subjects  there can be no such thing as an act           of  State."   And  this  proposition  was  finally           accepted in  the case  of Walker v. Baird, [ 1892-           A.C. 491, 494)"      The High  Court was,  therefore, in  error in upholding the plea  that the  order  dated  S.  1.1949  could  not  be questioned by the appellant who had joined service after the commencement of the Constitution.      There is  also no  rational basis  for refusing to give the benefit  of the service rendered by a teacher working in a ’B’  type High  School after  January 26,  1950 either for purposes of  seniority or  for  purposes  of  computing  the retirement benefits.  It may be open to the State Government while  integrating  the  services  of  teachers  working  in different kinds  of institutions  to introduce  a scheme  of rationalisation which  may have  the effect of modifying the conditions of  service of  different  groups  of  Government servants. It  cannot, however,  by a  stroke of pen deny the benefit of  the entire past service rendered by one group of such Government  servants.  The  effect  of  the  Government scheme was  that while  for purposes  of inter  se seniority amongst the  teachers of  ’B’ type High Schools, Ex-District Board High  Schools and  Ex-Anchal High  Schools,  that  is, integrated High  schools the length of continuous service in their respective  cadres in  their old  schools  was  to  be counted,  for  purposes  of  reckoning  seniority  vis-a-vis teachers in  Government schools  their  service  was  to  be counted, only  from the  date of  conversion of  those  High Schools to  Government Schools,  i.e., from  June  1,  1964. Consequently all teachers who had been in Government Schools immediately prior  to June  1, 1964  became seniors  to  the teachers working in ’B’ type High Schools, Ex-District Board High Schools  and Ex-Anchal  High Schools.  The  scheme  put forward by  the Government appears to us to be an irrational one. We  may at  this stage  mention that when this case was heard earlier  by a  bench of  three learned  Judges of this Court consisting  of V.R.  Krishna Iyer,  R.S. Pathak (as he then was) and o. Chinnappa Reddy, JJ. it was observed by the learned Judges on January 3 1, 1980 thus:           "We have  been taken  through the  judgment of the           High 660           Court and  the relevant facts by Shri Sikri and we           are satisfied  that the  reasons given by the High           Court are  far from  satisfactory.  On  the  other           hand, no  serious consideration  of the  ground of           discrimination in ignoring the past service of the           teachers has been given by the High Court."      After making the above order the learned Judges granted time to  the State  Government to  evolve a fresh scheme for integration of  the services  of the teachers in the schools referred in the scheme of 1964 with the teachers employed in the High Schools which were Government Schools all along. It is reported to us that the Government was not willing either to modify  the existing  scheme or to formulate a new scheme in a  reasonable way.  We respectfully  agree with the above observations made by the three learned Judges. We are of the view that the High Court was in error in upholding the terms of the  scheme insofar  as the  question  of  seniority  was

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 9  

concerned. We  are, therefore,  constrained to  reverse  the judgment of  the High Court insofar as the question relating to the validity of the terms of the scheme pertaining to the seniority of the teachers working in the schools referred to in it  is concerned.  We hold  that the clause in the scheme which  reads:  "But  for  the  purpose  of  reckoning  their seniority in  Government service,  their  services  will  be counted from  the date  of conversion  of the  schools  into Government schools"  is void. We direct the State Government to treat  on and  after January  26, 1950 the service of the teachers of  ’B’ type  High Schools,  Ex-District Board High Schools and  Ex-Anchal High Schools as the service under the State Government.  It is  open for  the State  Government to evolve a  reasonable formula  for integrating  the cadres of these teachers  with the  cadres of teachers in High Schools which have  been under  the  Government  all  along.  Before bringing  about   such  integration,   the  Government   may formulate reasonable  principles for  equating the  posts in the Government  High Schools  with the posts in the ’B’ type High Schools,  Ex-District Board  High Schools and Ex-Anchal High Schools  having regard to the minimum qualification for the posts,  pay, responsibilities  etc. In  the light of the said principles,  the Government  shall prepare  a seniority list. Thereafter.  it shall  proceed to  make promotions  of teachers to  higher cadres.  We may at this stage state that the learned  counsel for  the appellant  and other  teachers working in  ’B’ type  High Schools,  Ex-District Board  High Schools and  Ex-Anchal High Schools has submitted that these teachers do  not insist  upon promotions being given to them with retrospective  effect even if it is found that they are entitled to  it but they only pray that they may be promoted to the  vacancies which  may  occur  in  the  higher  cadres hereafter. We express our 661 appreciation of  the stand  taken by  the learned counsel in this regard.  The State Government shall, therefore, promote these teachers  to higher  posts as and when vacancies arise hereafter on  the basis  of their rank in the seniority list if they  are found  fit  for  such  promotion.  The  learned counsel has  further submitted  that if the State Government finds it  difficult to  integrate the  teachers belonging to ’B’ type  High Schools  and  teachers  of  other  integrated schools  with   the  teachers  working  in  Government  High Schools, the  State Government  may at  least  consider  the question of treating the two groups of teachers as belonging to separate  cadres and  reserve certain percentage of posts for being  filled up  only by  the teachers of ’B’ type High Schools, Ex-District  Board High  Schools and Ex-Anchal High Schools as  was the  case in  State of  Punjab  v.  Joginder Singh, [  1963] Supp.  2 S.C.R.  169. The  Government is  at liberty to  do so if it finds it to be convenient. The order of the  High Court  is, therefore,  modified  to  the  above extent and the State Government shall prepare seniority list and make promotions accordingly within six months from today in the light of the above observations.      As regards  the question  of the Contributory Provident Fund Scheme  is concerned,  we are informed that it has been satisfactorily  settled   by  the   State  Government.   We, therefore, express no opinion on that question.      The appeal is disposed of accordingly. S.L.                                      Appeal disposed of 662