102.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 09.02.2026 State of Punjab and another .... Appellants Versus Kashmira Singh .... Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. Satnampreet Singh Chauhan, DAG, Punjab, for the appellants.

Mr. Naresh Kumar, Advocate, for the respondent.

-----

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant Regular Second Appeal has been directed by the State of Punjab against the judgments and decrees passed by the courts below whereby the claim of the respondent-plaintiff for grant of selection grade at par with Jodh Singh has been accepted.

2. Parties to the lis hereinafter shall be referred to as per their original position before the learned Trial Court.

3. Briefly stated, the plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory injunction, seeking directions to the State of Punjab and District Education Officer, Hoshiarpur, to grant him selection grade prior to 11.04.1963, on which date, the same was granted to one Pritam Chand, who was at serial No.92 of the seniority list prepared on the basis of re-fixation of his seniority from serial No.89 to serial No.72. The plaintiff was appointed as a regular Drawing Master in the Education Department on 29.12.1961 and was confirmed on the said post on 10.03.1963. Initially, the seniority of teachers was maintained at the Divisional level; however, the same was cancelled on 18.01.1962 and, a fresh seniority list was prepared at District level by adopting the date of joining the cadre as criterion for determining the seniority instead of the date of confirmation, as provided under the Punjab Educational Services Class-III, School Cadre Rules, 1955, which was notified on 30.05.1957. The plaintiff was shown junior to many other teachers. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff filed a civil suit against the State for not fixing his seniority as per rules. The said suit was decreed, vide judgment and decree dated 20.10.1983, and it was held that seniority fixed by the department was wrong and was against the relevant rules and, therefore, fresh seniority list was ordered to be prepared on the basis of the date of confirmation. In compliance thereto, a revised seniority list of 93 persons was prepared by the District Education Officer, Hoshiarpur, wherein the name of plaintiff was placed at serial No.72, whereas the name of Pritam Chand, S & V Teacher of Government High School, Saroa, was placed at serial No.92. Despite the fact that Pritam Chand was junior to the plaintiff, he was given selection grade w.e.f. 11.04.1962, while the plaintiff was granted selection grade w.e.f. 04.05.1971. It was, therefore, pleaded that the plaintiff was entitled to the selection grade w.e.f. 11.04.1962 alongwith consequential revision of pensionary benefits. Despite repeated requests by the plaintiff, no action was taken by the defendants. Aggrieved thereby, the plaintiff filed civil suit, claiming all the abovesaid benefits. The suit was contested by the defendants, wherein it was admitted that the plaintiff was at Serial No.72 in the revised seniority list. With regard to Pritam Chand, it was pleaded that he was initially appointed on 11.04.1959 and was confirmed on 11.04.1960 when he was working at Government High School, Fazilka, District Ferozepur, and was granted selection grade w.e.f. 11.04.1962 on the basis of seniority as on 31.12.1959 maintained at Divisional level and, thereafter, he was transferred from Government High School, Fazilka to Government High School, Saroa, District Hoshiarpur, on 04.05.1965. The seniority of C&V Teacher at District level was prepared for the first time in the year 1968 after splitting up of Divisional level seniority and Pritam Chand was placed at the tail at serial No.92 in the District level seniority list because he had been transferred from Ferozepur District to Hoshiarpur District. It was further pleaded that no selection grade was granted to any junior teacher before granting the selection grade to the plaintiff. Howeve