Civil Appeal No 1109 of 1973
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and order dated the 10th March 197   of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in LPA No 714 of 1970 and Civil Appeals Nos
1411 1314 872 873 1369 and 1582 of 1974
F section Nariman In CAs
1109 and 1582 Harbans Singh in CA No 110973 and O P Sharma In all the appeals for the appellants
Hardyal Hardy section K Mehta and M Qamarrudin for respondents No 1  8
V C Mahajan Urmila Sirur section C Agarwala and V J Francis for respondents Nos
2 5 9 12 and 15 21 in CA No 110973
Urmila Sirur for respondents 2 7 12 13 15 18 20 22 26 27 30 32 36 38 41 44 46 50 57  59 62 In CA Nos 1411 1412 74 and for all the respondents in In CA No 141474 Except Respondent No 113 and respondents Nos
1 3 16 and 18 23 In CA No 136974
F V C Mahajan and Urmila Sirur for respondents Nos
All respondents in CA No 87274 and respondents Nos 1 2 4 54 5681 83 and 85 In CA No 87374 and respondents Nos 1 214 In CA No 158274
Balak Ram for respondent No 245 In CA No 158274
G The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAY CJ
These appeals are by special leave from the judgment dated 10 March 1972 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court
The respondents were teachers in the former State of Pepsu
On 1 November 1956 the former State of Pepsu merged in the State of Punjab
These teachers claim the revised scale of pay as well as the posts of Masters
Their claims are based on these grounds
First they have taken the Degrees in Bachelor of Teaching or its equivalent
Second the letter dated 23 July 1957 which became effective from 531 1 May 1957 entitles them to the revised grade if they took the Degrees in Bachelor of Teaching or its equivalent
Third the letter dated 7 November 1958 entitles the respondents to the posts of Masters to the extent of 25 per cent of the vacancies
The letter dated 23 July 1957 is addressed by the Secretary to the Punjab Government
The letter is on the subject Revision of Scales of pay of low paid Government servants
The letter states that after carefully considering the recommendations made by Pay Revision Committee it has been decided that the existing scales of pay of certain categories of posts should with effect from 1 May 1957 be revised as shown therein
It is thereafter stated that it has been decided that all teachers according to their qualifications should placed in the following two broad categories Category A  BABScBComBSc
Agriculture and BT Diploma in Physical EducationDiploma in Senior Basic Training
Category B  consists of four groups
The first group consists of Matriculates with Basic Training including Junior Teachers
The second group consists of Junior School Teachers including Assistant Mistresses with BAInter Matric Plus JAV Training
Groups III and IV are also mentioned which are not relevant for the purposes of these appeals
Thereafter the crucial portions in the letter are these
For category A  the scale of pay is Rs 110 8 1910 250 with a higher start for MA Or MSc
as at present
The existing per centage of posts fixed by Government for the scales of Rs 110 8 190 10 250 and Rs 250 10 300 should remain unchanged at 85 per cent and 15 per cent respectively
It may be stated here that the scale of pay of Head Masters being item 1 in Appendix is Rs 250 10 350
The scale of pay of Masters Science Masters Agriculture Masters Clerical and Commercial Master and Assistant District Inspector of Schools is Rs 250 10 300
The scale of pay of Second Master Masters Physical Training Masters Assistant District Inspector of Schools
Agriculture Masters Clerical and Commercial Masters and Science Masters being item 2 is Rs 110 8 190 10 250 with a start of Rs 126 to MAMScMIIIB T and Rs 150 to MA MScMEd11BT and Rs 150 to MAMScMEd
11BT 
The second letter on which the respondents relied is
dated 7 November 1958
This letter is from the Deputy Director Schools to the Inspector of Schools
The subject is Promotion of the so called unadjusted BA BTBEd teachers to the posts of Master on Rs 110250 grade It is stated there that it has been decided that 25 Per cent posts of BTBEd
Masters in Rs 110 250 grade should be filled by promotion from amongst the teachers working in the lower grade who have passed the BA BTBEd
Examinations
The selection is to be made on the basis of seniority cum merit
532 Two of the relevant rules in Punjab Educational Service Class III A school Cadre Rules 1955 which were in force with effect from 23 May 1957 are numbered 7 and 10
Rule 7 speaks of the method of recruitment
The methods of recruitment are a by direct appointment or b by transfer of an official from other Services or posts of Government in the Education Department of any Government in India or c by promotion from lower grades in the service
The manner of appointment shall be strictly by selection etcetera as mentioned there
Rule 10 states that members of the service will be entitled to such scales of pay as may be authorised by the Government from time to time
The scales of pay in force are specified in Appendix A  against each post
Appendix A  is an appendix to the Rules
This Appendix mentions Masters as item No 2
The scale of pay given in item No 2 for the posts of Masters who are ordinary graduates with degree of Bachelor of Teaching or equivalent thereof is Rs 110 8 19010 250 whereas for MAs
and MScs
with the degree of Bachelor of Teaching or Masters of Teaching or their equivalent the start of the grade is higher as already mentioned
The letter dated 23 July 1957 revised the scales of pay with effect from 1 May 1957
These appeals concern teachers who are in category A 
The revised scale given to teachers in category A  is Rs 110 8 19010 250
Any teacher who would satisfy the test mentioned in category A  would be entitled to the scale of pay
Counsel on behalf of the State contended that there was not to be a mass increase of all teachers to that grade of pay but the letter dated 23 July 1957 meant that a teacher who passed Bachelor of Teaching examination would be entitled to be appointed a Master and on being so appointed would be entitled to the scale of pay
With regard to the letter dated 7 November 1958 which stated that 25 per cent posts of BTBEd
Masters in Rs 110 250 grade should be filled by promotion from amongst the teachers who were in lower grade counsel for the State contended that teachers who were qualified by possessing BT BEd
degrees would be entitled to get 25 per cent of the posts provided the respective posts according to their subject combination were vacant
Rule 10 entitles the teachers to such scales of pay as may be authorised by the Government from time to time
The letter dated 23 July 1957 shows that teachers who possess the degree of Bachelor of Teaching or its equivalent on 1 May 1957 will be entitled to scales of pay mentioned therein
Those who will pass the examination of Bachelor of Teaching thereafter will be entitled to their revised scale of pay with effect from the date they pass the examination
The contention of the State that there was not to be a mass increase of scale of pay is unsound
Teachers who possessed degrees became entitled to scales of pay according to category A 
The High Court rightly referred to the letter of the Secretary of the Department dated 24 September 1957 that teachers holding BA 533 BTBA BEd
qualifications would hence forth be placed in category A 
The High Court rightly came to the conclusion that the scale of pay of Rs 110 250 would be effective either from the date when the teachers would pass the examination of Bachelor of Teaching or its equivalent or 1 May 1957 whichever is later
The High Court however gave the teachers the scales of salary confined to a period of 3 years and 2 months counting back from the date of the presentation of the writ petition
In other words the High Court did not allow the teachers any claim prior to 1967
The letter dated 7 November 1958 was necessary because in spite of the revised grade of Rs 110 250 having been granted to Bachelor in Teaching or equivalent thereof they were not being appointed by process of promotion to the posts of Masters
The letter stated that selection is to be made on the basis of seniority cum merit due regard being paid to good reputation regarding character popularity among students and parents and capacity to maintain discipline
The respondents claimed that according to the letter those of them who were Bachelor in Teaching or Bachelor in Education were entitled to be appointed to the posts of Masters
The teachers could not claim vacancies by promotion exceeding 25 per cent
Their claim for appointment by promotion had to take into consideration not merely their seniority but also their merit
This percentage of 25 as fixed by the letter is covered by Rule 7ii and the principle of selection for appointment is covered by Rule 7 clause iii
Therefore the earlier letter dated July 23 1957 fixed the scale of pay on the basis of academic qualifications
The subsequent letter dated 7 November 1958 recognised the right of promotion to the posts of Masters to the extent of 25 per cent
The High Court said that the contention of the State that the teachers could not be considered for promotion unless they satisfied the condition of subject combination namely that if they were ordinary graduates with training qualifications they must have studied two out of the four subjects namely History Geography Economics and political Science is not supported by the letter dated 7 November 1958
The High Court rightly said that the letter does not speak of any limitation of subject combination for promotion
Some of the teachers were from time to time promoted to the posts of Masters but never continuously beyond a period of six months
After completion of six months there was a break to avoid continuity in service for the posts of Masters beyond six months
The State contended that the teachers could not be considered for promotion unless the Board were satisfied that the teachers if ordinary graduate with training qualificationsmust have also studied two out of four subjects of History Geography Economics and Political Science
The teachers on the other hand contended that once the State Government had taken a decision as embodied in the letter dated 7 November 1958 the policy of not allowing the teachers to continue beyond six months on 534 temporary basis was nullifying the letter and spirit of the decision of the letter dated 7 November 1958
The teachers also contended that the promotion of teachers to Masters is completely independent of any consideration like the combination of subjects
The High Court rightly held that letter dated 7 November 1958 was subject only to two limitations
One was that teachers could not claim more than one fourth of the vacancies of the posts of Masters and the other was that the claim by way of promotion would be considered by the appointing authority on the basis of seniority cum merit
The High Court rightly held that the letter dated 7 November 1958 was not subject to the condition of subjects combination being fulfilled
There are three categories of teachers Science Masters Mathematics Masters and Social Studies Masters
No condition of combination of subjects can be read into the letter of 7 November 1958
The second conclusion of the High Court is correct that the teachers were to be treated as serving in that scale of pay continuously and not on six months basis
The third conclusion which the High Court arrived is correct that the teachers were to be considered for appointment to the posts of Masters to the extent of 25 per cent quota as recognised for their category of teachers on the basis of seniority cum merit without being subjected to the condition of subject combination
The judgment of the High Court is affirmed
The appeals are dismissed
The respondents will be entitled to one set of costs
PBR Appeals dismissed 


Summary:
Promotion from lower grades in the service to a higher grade is one on the methods of recruitment under r 7 of the Punjab Educational Service Class III School Cadre Rules 1955 Rule 10 of the rules states that members of the service would be entitled to such scales as may be authorised by the government from time to time
The State Government issued letter dated 23rd July 1957 on the subject of revision of scales of low paid government servants in which it was stated that the then existing scales of pay of certain categories of posts should with effect from 1 May 1957 be revised as shown therein
In that letter teachers according to their qualifications were placed in categories A and B and the respective scales o pay to which they were entitled were mentioned
The letter dated 7 November 1958 issued by the Deputy Director Schools to the Inspector of Schools stated that 25 of the posts of BTBEd
masters should be filled by promotion from amongst teachers working in the lower grade who have passed the above examinations and that the selection was to be made on the basis of seniority cum merit
The respondents who were teachers were promoted from time to time as masters but were never allowed continuously beyond six months to avoid continuity in service and were not given the revised scales
They claimed the revised scales of pay as well as the posts of masters on the ground that they had taken the degrees in Bachelor of Teaching or its equivalent that the letter dated 23 July 1957 which became effective from 1 May 1957 entitled them to the revised grade if they took the degree of Bachelor of Teaching or its equivalent and that the letter of 7 November 1958 entitled them to the posts of masters to the extent of 25 on the vacancies
The High Court allowed their prayers
In appeal to this Court it was con tended by the State that 1 there was not to be a mass increase of pay of all teachers to that grade of pay but what the letter dated 23 July 1957 meant was that a teacher who passed BT examination would be entitled to be appointed a master and on being so appointed would be entitled to the scale of pay
and ii that according to the letter of 7 November 1958 teachers who were qualified by possessing BTBEd
degrees would be entitled to get 25 of the posts provided the respective posts according to their subject combination were vacant
Dismissing the appeals  HELD The letter dated 23 July 1957 fixed the scale of pay on the basis of academic qualifications while the letter dated 7 November 1958 recognised the right of promotion to the posts of masters to the extent of 25
533E 1a Rule 10 entitles the teachers to such scales of pay as may be authorised by the Government from time to time
Letter dated 23 July
1957 showed that teachers who possessed the degree of BT Or its equivalent on 1 May 1957 would be entitled to scales of pay mentioned therein
Those who will pass the examination of  BT thereafter would be entitled to their revised scale of pay with effect from the date they passed the examination
532G b The contention of the State that there was not to be a mass increase of scales of pay is unsound
Teachers who possessed degrees became entitled to the scales of pay according to category A 532H 530 c The High Court rightly came to the conclusion that the scale of pay would be effective either from the date when the teachers would pass the examination of BT Or its equivalent or I May 1957 whichever is later
533B 2 The High Court rightly held that the letter dated 7 November 1958 was subject only to two limitations namely 1 that teachers could not claim more than one fourth of the vacancies of posts of masters and ii the claim by way of promotion would be considered by the appointing authority on the basis of seniority cum merit
No condition of combination of subjects could be read into the letter of 7 November 1958
The High Court was also correct in holding that the teachers were to be treated as serving in that scale of pay continuously and not on six months basis and that the teachers were to be considered for appointment to the posts of masters to the extent of 25 quota as recognised for their category of teachers on the basis of seniority cum merit without being subjected to the condition of subject combination
534A D