JUDGMENT : ARINDAM MUKHERJEE, J. 1. The appellants were recruited as Sub-Assistant Engineers in Kolkata Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'KMC') and possess a degree in engineering. They were respondent nos. 6 to 12, 14 and 15 in the writ petition. The respondent no. 29 described as proforma respondent in the appeal was also recruited as Sub-Assistant Engineer with a degree in engineering but has not challenged the order impugned. The respondent nos. 1 to 23 are the writ petitioners who were also been appointed as Sub-Assistant Engineers in KMC but possess diploma in various engineering branches. The respondent nos. 24 to 28 are the KMC and its officials/officers. These respondents were respondent nos. 1 to 5 in the writ petition. 2. The writ petition was essentially filed for the following reasons:- (a) The KMC through a recruitment process appoints Sub-Assistant Engineers (hereinafter referred to as the 'SAEs'). This is a sub-ordinate engineering cadre. The minimum qualification to appear in the recruitment process of Sub-Assistant Engineers is diploma in engineering in either civil/mechanical/electrical branch. (b) Since there is no bar for the candidates possessing higher qualification, that is, degree in civil/mechanical/electrical to appear in the recruitment process of Sub-Assistant Engineers, the degree holders who became successful in the selection process were also appointed as Sub-Assistant Engineers along with those who possessed diploma in engineering. So the cadre of Sub-Assistant Engineer consist of both degree and diploma engineers of civil/mechanical/electrical stream. (c) The gradation list as per the merit list prepared in course of the recruitment process is adopted by the Municipal Service Commission. (d) The next promotion from SAE is to the post of Assistant Engineer. This is an engineering cadre which starts from the post of Assistant Engineers and proceeds up to the post of Chief Engineer. The Assistant Engineers are appointed through separate recruitment process where the minimum qualification is degree in engineering in civil/mechanical/electrical stream. (e) All SAEs are eligible for promotion to the next higher post, that is, Assistant Engineer after completion of ten years. However, due to shortage of available promotional post in the cadre of Assistant Engineer for the promotion of SAEs, the KMC in order to compensate the SAEs formulated a Carrier Advancement Scheme. (e) All SAEs are eligible for promotion to the next higher post, that is, Assistant Engineer after completion of ten years. However, due to shortage of available promotional post in the cadre of Assistant Engineer for the promotion of SAEs, the KMC in order to compensate the SAEs formulated a Carrier Advancement Scheme. As per the first Carrier Advancement Scheme, after completion of ten years of service a SAE is placed to the next higher scale, that is, from scale no. 12 to scale no. 13, though according to the writ petitioners, that scale should have been no. 16 being the next promotional scale applicable to Assistant Engineers. The writ petitioners also alleged that, there is no scope of second Carrier Advancement Scheme in fifteen years in case of SAEs having diploma. (f) Finding stagnation amongst the SAEs, the KMC authorities by a circular dated 17th June, 2008 introduced a new scheme by providing the SAEs who have completed twenty years of satisfactory service in KMC with the basic scale of pay of the Assistant Engineers being Rs. 8000-275-13000. The then existing scheme for 1/3 : 2/3 up -gradation facilities to second next higher scale were done away with. This benefit was extended with effect from 1st May, 2008. (g) Subsequently, finding that SAEs are losing motivation at work being stagnated at the same post in some cases even after completion of twenty five years of service despite being awarded the pay scale of Assistant Engineers as per the existing scheme, KMC formulated a further scheme keeping the existing scheme of providing higher scale of pay in operation to provide the SAE's the post of Assistant Engineer so that they could enjoy the same. A proposal was given for creating supernumerary posts of Assistant Engineers as and where necessary and offer such posts to the SAEs. The criteria for awarding such post to the SAEs will appear from the "specific proposal" contained in the agenda note date 19th April, 2012. The same are reiterated hereinbelow:- (1) (a) "The SAEs who have completed 25 years of service or more in the present post may be promoted to the post Asstt. Engineer in their respective discipline by way of creation of supernumerary posts wherever required subject to fulfilment of promotional norms. The same are reiterated hereinbelow:- (1) (a) "The SAEs who have completed 25 years of service or more in the present post may be promoted to the post Asstt. Engineer in their respective discipline by way of creation of supernumerary posts wherever required subject to fulfilment of promotional norms. (b) The SAEs having degree qualification and have completed 13 years of service or more in the present post out of which 5 years as degree holder may be promoted to the post of Asstt. Engineer by way of creation of supernumerary posts wherever required subject to fulfilment of promotional norms. (c) (i)To take an exercise at the beginning of each year to asses similar cases as per clause mentioned in (a) and (b) and to review if such cases may be accommodated. (ii) At present 3 nos of diploma holder SAEs (C) and 12 nos of SAEs (M) come under the purview of the proposed scheme having completed 25 years and 10 nos of degree holder SAEs (C) come under the purview of the proposed scheme having completed 13 years as SAEs including 5 years as degree holder SAEs (As on 31.12.2011)." (h) This proposal was accepted and the Municipal Commissioner by his order dated 30th June, 2012 had approved the following for the implementation of resolution. "In the light of the above, the Mpl. Commissioner by his order dated 30.06.2012 has approved the following for the implementation of the resolution: (1) The diploma holder SAEs who have completed 25 years of service or more in the present post as on 31.12.2011 are to be promoted to the post of Asstt. Engineer in their respective discipline by way of creation of supernumerary posts wherever required subject to fulfilment of promotional norms. (2) The degree holder SAEs who have completed 13 years of service or more in the present post out of which 5 years as degree holder SAEs as on 31.12.2011 are to be promoted to the post of Asstt. Engineer by way of creation of supernumerary posts wherever required subject to the fulfilment of promotional norms. (3) The said supernumerary posts will be adjusted against the permanent vacancies in regular manner as and when the vacancy becomes available within the sanctioned posts of Assistant Engineer. (4) At present and at the beginning of each year an exercise will be made by the Personnel Deptt. (3) The said supernumerary posts will be adjusted against the permanent vacancies in regular manner as and when the vacancy becomes available within the sanctioned posts of Assistant Engineer. (4) At present and at the beginning of each year an exercise will be made by the Personnel Deptt. to find out the eligible SAEs for promotion against supernumerary posts completing 25 years as diploma holder SAE and 13 years (5 years with degree) as degree holder SAE, who could not be promoted against the regular posts during the previous year upto 31st December for which Personnel Deptt. will issue Office Orders by observing necessary criteria and by obtaining necessary approval from the authority. (5) There would be no change in the existing R/R for the posts of Assistant Engineer. (6) The pay of the eligible S.A.Es as mentioned above may be fixed as A.E on promotion against supernumerary posts from the date of joining in the post. (7) The facts relating to the above and with reference to the M-I-C and Mpl. Corporation resolution may be noted in the respective Service Books with proper verification by the concerned I.F.U. (8) The pay scale and the post of A.E so awarded to the eligible SAEs against supernumerary posts as mentioned above may be treated as personal to them for subsequent adjustments against availability of permanent vacancies. All concerned are requested to take necessary action immediately in this regard." This forms part of the circular dated 3rd July, 2012. 3. On the basis of such order and circular, a list was prepared as will appear from the circular dated 5th July, 2012 providing the names of the diploma holder SAEs and the degree holder SAEs who were to be designated as Assistant Engineers (supernumerary posts). 4. In the writ petition, the writ petitioners (respondent nos. 1 to 23) challenged the circular dated 3rd July, 2012 and the gradation list prepared in terms thereof being Annexure P-5 and P-6 to the writ petition. The main grievance of the writ petitioners are that the Municipal Authorities could not have fixed different parameters for promotion of SAE's holding diploma and SAE's holding degree qualification. They contend that classification within the same cadre cannot be made as it amounts to violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The main grievance of the writ petitioners are that the Municipal Authorities could not have fixed different parameters for promotion of SAE's holding diploma and SAE's holding degree qualification. They contend that classification within the same cadre cannot be made as it amounts to violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. They submit that once several persons have become members of one service they stand as equals and cannot, thereafter, be individually differentiated for the purpose of salary, security, promotion or otherwise, based on the source of recruitment or other adventitious factors. 5. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by KMC, the respondent no. 24 (in appeal) and respondent no. 1 in the writ petition the following has been stated:- (i) Initially by a circular dated 23rd December, 1994, 50 per cent of the total strength of Assistant Engineers were directed to be filled in by promotion from the common cadre of SAEs and the balance 50 per cent by way of direct recruitment through examination where the minimum educational qualification is degree in engineering (civil/mechanical/electrical). (ii) Thereafter, to improve the promotional avenue of SAEs by a circular dated 7th August, 1997 it was decided that 45 per cent of Assistant Engineers would be filled in from SAEs belonging to the common cadre, 45 per cent by direct recruitment and 10 per cent from SAEs having degree in engineering and serving ten years as SAE out of which five years as a degree holder. (iii) This was further modified by the circular dated 20th February, 2002 by which 50 per cent of Assistant Engineers were to be filled in from common cadre of SAEs, 15 per cent from degree holder SAEs with thirteen years experience in service out of which five years as degree holder and 35 per cent through direct recruitment. (iv) Then came the First Career Advancement Scheme to remove partial stagnation in the promotion of SAEs to the next higher post, that is, Assistant Engineer. By the circular dated 17th June, 2008 the then existing scheme of 1/3:2/3 up gradation facilities to the second next higher scale in respect of SAEs was given a go bye and SAEs were decided to be given the basic pay scale of Assistant Engineers on completion of twenty years of satisfying service with effect from 1st May, 2008. (v) This was followed by a Second Career Advancement Scheme. (v) This was followed by a Second Career Advancement Scheme. (vi) The circular dated 3rd July, 2012 was introduced to award the post of Assistant Engineer to the SAEs by creating supernumerary posts so that SAEs who were not getting the post of Assistant Engineer as all the posts of Assistant Engineers available for promotion under the previous circulars were already full which resulted in SAEs with long service to be frustrated on not being awarded the post of Assistant Engineer though they were getting the benefit of Assistant Engineers as to the pay scale. 6. On the basis of this allegations KMC says that there has been no discrimination between diploma holders SAEs and degree holder SAEs as the KMC as an employer is entitled to create such differentiation for effective discharge of duty by removing frustration amongst the SAEs. 7. The learned Single Judge after considering the decisions cited at the bar and upon hearing the parties was pleased to allow the writ petition by an order holding that the impugned circular dated 3rd July, 2012 seeking to implement Clause 2 of the resolution as arbitrary and unconstitutional. The impugned circular dated 3rd July, 2012 was struck down being violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. 8. Challenging the said order the present appeal has been filed. Before us, the parties have reiterated their respective stands as taken before the learned Single Judge. 9. The circular dated 7th August, 1997, therefore, for the first time created a quota for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer from the common cadre of SAE. The same remained in force till the circular dated 20th February, 2002 came into operation. 10. On a perusal of the said circular dated 20th February, 2002 it will appear that, 50 per cent of the post of the total cadre strength of Assistant Engineer shall be filled from common cadre of Sub Assistant Engineers having at least ten year of experience as Sub Assistant Engineer. Fifteen per cent of the total cadre strength was to be filled by promotion from amongst the SAEs having an engineering degree or equivalent and having at least ten years of experience as SAE out of which a minimum five years should be as a degree holder. The balance thirty five per cent was to be filled through direct recruitment. 11. The balance thirty five per cent was to be filled through direct recruitment. 11. The circular dated 20th February, 2002 was challenged in a Writ Petition 3720(W) of 2008 (Manas Kumar Sinha vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.). The writ petitioners though have mentioned about this litigation in paragraph 26 of the writ petition but have given incomplete particulars. On checking the records it is found that W.P 3720 of 2008 appeared in the list with W.P 15614 (W) of 2012 wherefrom the order impugned emanates on 25th August, 2015 when W.P 3720 of 2008 was disposed of allowing the writ petitioners to go ahead with their representation before the KMC authorities and W.P 15614 (W) of 2012 was delinked therefrom. 12. On an analysis of the circulars referred to hereinabove it appears that:- (i) The quota for promotion from the common cadre of SAE to Assistant Engineer was created as far back in 7th August, 1997 when 45 per cent was to be drawn from SAE's common cadre, 10 per cent from SAEs having degree with ten years experience as SAE out of which five years as degree engineer. This circular remained unchallenged. Subsequently, the circular dated 20th February, 2002 came into effect when promotion to Assistant Engineer from SAE's common cadre remained 50 per cent whereas for degree engineers it was increased to 15 per cent with the number of years of experience being increased from ten years to thirteen years. This circular was challenged in W.P 3720 of 2008 but the same was unsuccessful. By the order dated 25th August, 2015 only the representation of the writ petitioners therein was directed to be considered. It appears that the said circular still remains in operation. (ii) Thereafter, came the two Career Advancement Schemes. By the first of which, dated 17th June, 2008 the SAEs on having completed twenty years of satisfactory service were given the basic pay scale of Assistant Engineers. This circular also remained unchallenged. (iii) Subsequently, when it was found that for paucity of the post of Assistant Engineer on the same not falling vacant for several years and that a Sub Assistant Engineer is not actually enjoying such post though they are enjoying the pay scale, it was decided to create supernumerary posts so that a Sub Assistant Engineer is actually designated as an Assistant Engineer. In case of awarding such supernumerary post a classification was formulated by an under which all diploma holder SAEs on completion of 25 years service as SAE and a degree holder SAE on completion of 13 years of service as SAE out of which 5 years as degree holder become entitled to such supernumerary posts. The supernumerary posts were also treated to be personal to the holder and was subject to adjustment against availability of permanent vacancies. (iv) So the quota for promotion from SAEs to Assistant Engineers on the basis of educational qualification and years of experience was created on 7th August, 1997 and not for the first time by the circular dated 3rd July, 2012. The SAEs irrespective of their qualification on completion of twenty years of service are given the basic pay scale of Assistant Engineers though, due to paucity of actual promotional post in the cadre of Assistant Engineers they are not designated as Assistant Engineers. By creation of supernumerary posts the SAEs are to be designated as Assistant Engineers. They do not get any other benefits apart from being designated as Assistant Engineers. From out of the common cadre of SAE 50 per cent of Assistant Engineers are to be filled in irrespective of qualification, that is, degree or diploma holders, 15 per cent of Assistant Engineers are to be filled in by degree holders with ten years of experience out of which five years as degree holder. The impugned circular dated 3rd July, 2012 does not affect the prevalent promotional avenues but proceeds to confer the diploma holder SAEs on completion of twenty five years of service and degree engineers with thirteen years of service out of which five years as degree holder with the designation of Assistant Engineer by creating supernumerary posts. These supernumerary posts are personal to the designated SAEs and are subject to adjustment against permanent vacancies on being created. These designated SAEs are in any event the senior most diploma holder SAEs and degree holder SAEs. 13. The word "Supernumerary" as per Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English means "in excess of the normal number". Blacks' Law Dictionary (10th Edition) defines "Supernumerary" as "persons above the number" or "officials beyond the permitted number". These designated SAEs are in any event the senior most diploma holder SAEs and degree holder SAEs. 13. The word "Supernumerary" as per Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English means "in excess of the normal number". Blacks' Law Dictionary (10th Edition) defines "Supernumerary" as "persons above the number" or "officials beyond the permitted number". The creation of supernumerary post of Assistant Engineer, therefore, does not increase the normal strength of the cadre of Assistant Engineer so as to make available additional permanent posts of Assistant Engineers available for promotion from SAEs. This circular of 3rd July, 2012, therefore, gives the designation of Assistant Engineer to the SAEs eligible thereunder on personal basis and not promotion to permanent vacancies. The circular neither obstruct or alters the promotional scope of diploma holder SAEs nor does it enhance the promotional avenues of degree holder SAEs to the post of Assistant Engineers. 14. The said circular dated 3rd July, 2012 does not make any classification for the purpose of promotion. It also does not amount to discrimination amongst equals in a common cadre. The argument advanced by the writ petitioners that such classification in a common cadre on the basis of greater number of years in service in case of diploma holders and less number of years in service in case of degree holders amounts to discrimination within a common cadre thereby violating the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 cannot be accepted. The promotional avenue from SAE to Assistant Engineer remains unchanged even on creation of supernumerary posts. The Sub Assistant Engineers given a supernumerary post of Assistant Engineer does not by such act qualify to be promoted to post above Assistant Engineer on being designated as Assistant Engineers. The circular of 3rd July, 2012 which is under challenge does not also speak of promoting the SAEs so designated as Assistant Engineers by creation of supernumerary post to the permanent vacancy of Assistant Engineers or to higher posts over Assistant Engineer. The normal gradation list as per the circular dated 20th February, 2002 remains in operation for filling in the permanent posts of Assistant Engineers (not the supernumerary ones). The list sought to be prepared in terms of the circular dated 3rd July, 2012 is only for the purpose of creation of supernumerary post to designate those SAEs fulfilling the eligibility criteria under the circular dated 3rd July, 2012 as Assistant Engineers. The list sought to be prepared in terms of the circular dated 3rd July, 2012 is only for the purpose of creation of supernumerary post to designate those SAEs fulfilling the eligibility criteria under the circular dated 3rd July, 2012 as Assistant Engineers. It does not promote the SAEs against the permanent vacancy created to the posts of Assistant Engineers actually available for promotion. 15. An impression is sought to be given that the quota created for promotion by the circular dated 20th February, 2002 and partially modified by the circular dated 17th June, 2008 is being superseded by the circular dated 3rd July, 2012. This is misconceived for the reasons as aforesaid. 16. The appellants have relied upon the hollowing judgments:- (1) The State of Jammu & Kashmir vs. Shri Trilokinath Khosha & Ors., (1974) 1 SCC 19 . (2) Roop Chand Adlakha & Ors. vs. Delhi Development Authority & Ors, AIR 1989 SC 307 . (3) Rajasthan State Electricity Board Accountants Association, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan State Electricity Board and Anr., (1997) 3 SCC 103 . (4) Chandravathi P.K & Ors. vs. C.K. Saji & Ors., AIR 2004 SC 2717 . The respondents, (writ petitioners) on the other hand, have relied upon the following judgments:- (1) Union of India & Ors vs. Atul Shukla Etc., AIR 2015 SC 1777 . (2) Food Corporation of India & Ors. vs. Omprakash Sharma & Ors., (1998) 7 SCC 676 . (3) Government of W.B vs. Tarun K. Roy and Ors., (2004) 1 SCC 347 . (4) Krishna Priya Ganguly & Ors. vs. University of Lucknow & Ors., (1984) 1 SCC 307 . These decisions have also considered several other judgments of the Supreme Court pronounced in between. 17. We have considered the judgments relied upon by the parties. In the case of Trilokinath Khosha, it has been clearly held that, classification on the basis of educational qualification made with a view to achieve administrative efficiency cannot be set to rest on any fortuitous circumstances and one has to bear in mind the facts and circumstances of the case in order to judge the validity of the classification. The judgment further holds that, it is open to the State or its agencies to give preferences to candidate having higher educational qualification. The subsequent judgments cited by the appellants have accepted the proposition laid down in Trilokinath Khosha. The judgment further holds that, it is open to the State or its agencies to give preferences to candidate having higher educational qualification. The subsequent judgments cited by the appellants have accepted the proposition laid down in Trilokinath Khosha. The departure to this view according to the respondents is to be found in the judgments reported in Atul Shukla's case. In the facts of the instant case as discussed above, we are of the view that this judgment has no manner of application though there can be no dispute as to the ratio laid down therein. In fact, the proposition laid down in (Mohd. Shujat Ali vs. Union of India, (1975) 3 SCC 76 ) being the sheet anchor of the respondents' argument also does not apply to the facts of the case. The line of case following Shujat Ali also does not apply in the facts of the instant case. On the other hand, the view expressed in the case reported in (Shamkant Narayan Despande vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, (1993) Supp2 SCC 194) and (Roop Chand Adlakha & Ors. vs. Delhi Development Authority & Ors., AIR 1989 SC 307 ) relying upon Trilokinath Khosha's case, supports the classification being made on the basis of educational qualification for promotion thereby creating quota for promotion. Assuming without admitting that a classification has been made on the basis of educational qualification or years of experience is impermissible for being arbitrary or in violation of Articles 14 and 16 then also it does not apply in the facts of the instant case. Moreover, classification is permissible to achieve administrative effectiveness. Here KMC has made the classification to achieve administrative effectiveness by removing frustration amongst the SAEs. 18. It is clear from the agenda, resolution and the circular dated 3rd July, 2012 that the same was introduced for administrative effectiveness as it was seen that SAEs working for long years designated as SAEs though receive the pay scale of Assistant Engineers are found to be frustrated thereby effecting the administrative operation. The SAEs are, therefore, sought to be designated as Assistant Engineers by creating supernumerary posts. The right of State or its agencies to frame policy for effective administrative purpose is recognized by the Courts and the same being a policy decision is required to be interfered with by exercise of great caution. The SAEs are, therefore, sought to be designated as Assistant Engineers by creating supernumerary posts. The right of State or its agencies to frame policy for effective administrative purpose is recognized by the Courts and the same being a policy decision is required to be interfered with by exercise of great caution. The classification under the circular dated 3rd July, 2012, therefore, is not arbitrary or unreasonable. It is also not violative to Articles 14 and 16. 19. We, therefore, set aside the order impugned and dismiss the writ petition upholding the circular and the gradation list under challenge. There shall, however, be no order as to cost. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order/judgment, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on a priority basis.