ivil Appeal No 6229 of 1983
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 29th May 1980 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No 1225 of 1980
KG Bhagat Addl
Soliciter General and K K Mohan for the appellant
R N Poddar For the Respondent
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHINNAPPA REDDY J
Special leave granted
655 Smt
P Grover was an outstanding teacher
In 1968 69 the Government of Haryana honoured her by presenting the State Award for teachers
She attained the age of superannuation on August 2s0 1978
About two years before she attained the age of superannuation she was promoted as acting District Education Officer with effect from July 19 1976
The Government of Haryana had taken a policy decision as early as in 1965 that the Services of teachers who had received the National or State Awards should be extended until they attained the age of 60 years on an year by year basis if their service record continued to be good otherwise
Pursuant to the policy decision Smt
Grover s services were extended first by one year and later by another year
During the period of extension of service she worked as Principal Government Higher Secondary School Mahendergarh
She finally retired from service on August 31 1980
We mentioned that she was promoted as an acting District Education officer with effect from July 19 1976
The order of promotion contained a super added condition that she would draw her own pay scale which apparently meant that she would continue to draw her salary on her pay scale prior to promotion
The initial order extending her services recited that she was an acting District Education Officer but contained a super added condition that her pay would not be more than the maximum of the Principal s grade
Grover claims that having been promoted as District Education officer she was entitled to the pay of a District Education officer and there was no justification for denying the same to her
A writ petition filed by her was dismissed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and she is before us by way of special leave under article 136 of the Constitution
The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Government of Haryana offers no rational explanation for denying the pay of District Education Officer to Smt
P Grover after she was promoted to act as District Education officer
All that was said in the counter affidavit was that there were no Class I post available and therefore she was not entitled to be paid the salary of District Education officer
We are unable to understand the reason given in the counter affidavit
She was promoted to the post of District Education officer a Class I post on an acting basis
Our attention was not invited to any rule which provides that promotion on an acting basis would not entitle the officer promoted to the pay of the post
In the absence of any rule justifying such refusal to pay to an officer promoted to a higher post the salary of such higher post the 656 validity of such a rule would be doubtful if it existed we must hold that Smt
Grover is entitled to be paid the salary of a District Education officer from the date she was promoted to the post that is July 19 1976 until she retired from service on August 31 1980
The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs
HLC Appeal allowed


Summary:
HELD The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Government of Haryana offers no rational explanation for denying the pay of District Education officer to the appellant after she was promoted to act as District Education Officer
In the absence of any rule justifying such refusal to pay to an officer promoted to a higher post the salary of such higher post the appellant is entitled to be paid the salary of a District Education officer from the date she was promoted to the post
655 F G