Judgement

K. VENKATASWAMI. J. :- Leave granted.

2. I. A. No. 1/95 for impleadment is allowed .

3. The appellants are teachers in Government schools in the State of Haryana. The appellants were appointed as(J.B.T.) teachers in the schools as they did not possess B. T./B.Ed. qualification at the time of their appointments. However, they acquired B. T/B. Ed. degree on various dates as mentioned in page 9 of the S. L. P. Paper Book and also at page 53 (so far as newly impleaded appellant No. 8 is concerned). They moved the High Court of Punjab and Haryana under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issue of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to give them the higher grade admissible to the Masters with effect from respective dates of their acquiring B. T. B. Ed . qualifications and they also prayed for issue of writ of Mandamus to the respondents to implement the decision/direction of this Court in the case of Chaman Lal v. State of Haryana, reported in (1987) 3 SCC 113: (AIR 1987 SC 1621).

4. In response to the notice of motion issued by the High Court, written statement on behalf of respondents was filed and therein it was brought to the notice of the Court that the erstwhile Punjab Governments Instructions dated July 23, 1957 on the basis of which the petitioners/appellants rested their claims, stood superseded and no more applicable to the employees of the Haryana Government. It was also stated in the written statement that a policy decision was taken by the Government of Haryana in Finance Department Letter No. 7/2(i)/90-FRI dated March 9, 1990 Stating that the pay scales admissible to the Masters, that is, B. A., B. Ed. would be given to such teachers who have been appointed against the posts for which the qualification B. A., B. Ed. In the light of the written statement and also applying the earlier decision of the High Court in C. W. P. No. 14736 of 1991 dated December 1, 1992, the learned Judges held that the appellants were not entitled to the reliefs prayed for as they were never appointed against the post of Masters. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition, the present special leave to appeal is preferred by the appellants.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants strenuously urged before us that the ratio laid down by this Court in (1987) 3 SCC 113 : (AIR 1987 SC 1621) (supra) will, apply in full force to the facts of this case and, therefore, the appellants would be entitled to succeed in the present appeal.

6. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that in Chaman Lals case (AIR 1987 SC 1621) this Court was considering the scope of the letter dated July 23, 1957 issued by the composite Punjab Government in the light of subsequent order of Haryana Government dated 5-9-79. However, in the present case the letter dated 23-7-57 stood superseded by the latest policy instructions issued by the Haryana Govt. on 9-3-1990 and therefore, the judgment in (1987) 3 SCC 113: (AIR 1987 SC 1621) will be of no avail. He also invited our attention to the policy instructions contained in the letter dated 9-3-1990 which is Annexure III to the Special Leave Petition found at page 44.

7. But for the policy instructions now issued by the Haryana Government on 9-3-1990, the ruling of this Court in Chaman Lals case (AIR 1987 SC 1621 would have definitely applied to the facts of this case. In Chaman Lals case this Court considered both the letter dated 23-7-1957 and the Order dated 5-9-1979. While considering the scope of the letter and order, this Court also took note of certain admissions made by the Government during that period and observed as follows (at pp. 1924-25 of AIR):

"It is thus seen that from 1957 to 1980 whenever the question arose, it was always accepted that teachers who acquired the B. T. or B. Ed. qualification would be entitled to higher grade of pay as soon as they acquired the qualification irrespective of the dates when they were adjusted against the posts of Masters. The adjustmen