JUDGMENT M.L. Bhat, J. - The Petitioner has filed two writ petitions No. 4698 of 1991 and 26296 of 1991. The fate of these two writ petitions is dependent on the validity or otherwise of the impugned order dated 31-8-1991 passed by the Respondent No. 2 and consequential order dated 7-9-1991 passed by the Respondent No. 3. 2. In writ petition No. 4698 of 1991 the Petitioner prays that the Respondents be directed to make the payment of full grade/difference of the salary to the Petitioner for the post of Assistant Teacher in the Senior Basic School on the basis of the orders contained in Annexures 6 and 10 to the writ petition. This writ petition seems to have been presented before the Court on 20-2-1991. After the filing of this writ petition the impugned orders dated 31-8-1991 and 7-9-1991, which are subject matter of writ petition No. 26296 of 1991 were passed. Therefore, the Petitioner has filed a separate writ petition challenging those two orders. In both the writ petitions the controversy relates to the status of the Petitioner and her entitlement to draw salary as Assistant Teacher of the Primary School according to the Respondents and her right to draw salary as Assistant Teacher of Junior High School according to the Petitioner. 3. The facts relevant for the decision of these two writ petitions in sequence are summarised hereunder. 4. The Petitioner is said to have been appointed as Assistant Teacher in Junior Basic School on 17-1-1970. She started functioning as Assistant Teacher with effect from 22-1-1970. Thereafter she was appointed Headmistress in Primary Pathshala as the post of Headmistress in the said Pathshala had fallen vacant. She was transferred to Junior Basic School, Holipura, Agra, as Headmistress vide order dated 2-10-1970. She is said to have joined on the post on 18-10-1970. However, she' was paid salary at the rate of the pay scale, which was admissible to Assistant Teacher of Junior Basic School, though she was discharging the functions of Headmistress with effect from 8-10-1970. The Petitioner seems to have been transferred as Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School. The pay scales of Headmistress of Junior Basic School and that of Assistant Teacher of Senior Basic School are similar. A copy of the transfer order dated 25-11-1970 is placed on record. The Petitioner seems to have been transferred as Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School. The pay scales of Headmistress of Junior Basic School and that of Assistant Teacher of Senior Basic School are similar. A copy of the transfer order dated 25-11-1970 is placed on record. The Petitioner has been demanding the pay scale admissible to Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School because she was working against the post and was discharging the functions of Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School. She is said to have moved an application on 5-9-1971 for allowing her to draw the pay scale of Headmistress of Junior Basic School from 8-10-1970 to 25-11-1970 and also the pay scale of Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School but no heed was paid on her application. She is said to have filed another similar application on 3-5-1981, on which the Respondent No. 2 is said to have passed an order directing the Respondent No. 3 to make payment of entire arrears to her. The said direction also was not carried out by the Respondent No. 3. On 29-6-1985 the Addl. District Basic Education Officer (Women), Agra is said to have' written a letter to the Respondent No. 2 stating that the Petitioner was made Headmistress in Junior Basic School on 2-10-1970 and she was entitled to the pay scale attached to the said post since 2-10-1970 and her seniority be also fixed accordingly. A copy of this letter is placed on record. No action was taken on this letter. The Petitioner approached the Respondent No. 2 for implementing the directions contained in the said letter. The Respondent No. 2 is said to have passed an order on 17-7-1985 on the application of the Petitioner directing the concerned officials to fix the salary of the Petitioner. A copy of this application with endorsement of the Respondent No. 2 is also placed on record. She is said to have moved another application on 11-8-1985 and on this application the Respondent No. 2 is said to have directed one Smt. Santosh Bala Khare, Assistant Inspectress of Girls Schools, Agra to hold an enquiry. A report is said to have been filed by the said Smt. Khare on 12-2-1990. It was stated in the report that the Petitioner was appointed on 22-1-1970 and she was promoted as Headmistress on 2-10-1970. A report is said to have been filed by the said Smt. Khare on 12-2-1990. It was stated in the report that the Petitioner was appointed on 22-1-1970 and she was promoted as Headmistress on 2-10-1970. The enquiry report recommended the payment of the salary as claimed by the Petitioner. A copy of the recommendation in favour of the Petitioner is annexed to the writ petition on 6-10-1985 the Petitioner is said to have been given the grade but within two months thereafter it was stopped. 5. On the basis of the recommendation dated 12-2-1990 the Respondent No. 1 is said to have passed an order on 30-4-1990 holding the Petitioner entitled for full grade of either Headmistress of Junior Basic School or of Assistant Teacher of Junior High School since 12-12-1970 and directing the Accounts Officer/Deputy Inspectress of Girls Schools to make the entire payment, which was approved by the Respondent No. 2A copy of order is placed on the file. The Petitioner has been throughout shown as Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School for the last more than 20 years and the Petitioner's juniors have already been promoted as Assistant Teachers. She has given the names of some candidates in para 30 of the writ petition, who are juniors to the Petitioner and who have been confirmed as Assistant Teachers in Senior Basic School. Instead the impugned orders dated 31-8-1991 and 7-9-1991 came to be passed. By these orders the Petitioner is reverted as Assistant Teacher of Primary School. The Respondent No. 2 has recommended on 30-4-1990 to treat the Petitioner as Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School and has directed to give her the grade and arrears of pay for the post which she was holding. Contrary to this the Petitioner has been reduced in rank and salary in violation of the principles of natural justice. 6. Counter affidavits and rejoinder affidavits have been filed. In the counter affidavits in both the writ petitions the respondent's case is that the Petitioner was not eligible to be promoted to the post of Headmistress in 1970 and her transfer as Asstt. Teacher to Senior Basic School was also made in violation of the rules. She continues to be Asstt. Teacher in the Primary Pathshala and her transfer to higher grade could not be ordered under the rules. Teacher to Senior Basic School was also made in violation of the rules. She continues to be Asstt. Teacher in the Primary Pathshala and her transfer to higher grade could not be ordered under the rules. She was transferred by some officers, who seem to have connived with her and that transfer order from Primary Pathshala to Senior Basic School as Assistant Teacher would not confer any right on her to hold the post when she is not eligible to hold that post under the rules. The respondent's further case is that by virtue of the order dated 10-5-1990 the order passed by the Respondent No. 2 on 30-4-1990 in favour of the Petitioner has been made ineffective .However, the Petitioner has filed a copy of the order dated 26-5-1990 with the rejoinder affidavit, which says the order of 10-5-1990 whereby the order dated 30-4-1990 was made ineffective .The effect of the order dated 26-5-1990 is that the order dated 30-4-1990 in favour of the Petitioner survives and is operative. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and, perused the record of both the writ petitions and given my anxious thought to the controversy raised in the two writ petitions. 7. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the Petitioner was fully qualified to be appointed as Assistant Teacher in Primary Pathshala. Thereupon the Respondents promoted her to the post of Headmistress of the Primary Pathshala. The post of Headmistress of Primary Pathshala was equivalent in pay and grade to the post of Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School. She was transferred to senior Basic School as Assistant Teacher where she has held the post of Assistant Teacher for more than 20 years. The post carries higher pay and grade than the post of Assistant Teacher of Primary Pathshala. She also submits that there are recommendations and orders in her favour that she be given the pay scale of Assistant Teacher of senior Basic School. Even otherwise she is entitled to draw the said pay scale because she has worked as Assistant Teacher of Senior Basic School for more than 20 years. The order dated 30-4-1990 is in existence and that has been made ineffective by the impugned order. An attempt was made to make it ineffective on 10-5-1990 also but that mistake was rectified on 26-5-1990. The order dated 30-4-1990 is in existence and that has been made ineffective by the impugned order. An attempt was made to make it ineffective on 10-5-1990 also but that mistake was rectified on 26-5-1990. Therefore, the order of the Respondent No. 2 dated 30-4-1990 survives and the impugned order cannot affect the rights of the Petitioner. It is stated that the Petitioner has continuously been discharging the duties of Assistant Teacher of Senior Basic School. She cannot be reverted now after 20 years as Assistant Teacher in Primary Pathshala. The impugned order has civil consequences as the said order has visited the Petitioner with harshness. It has the effect of reducing her salary and grade and would affect her seniority also. The order as such is said to be bad in law, illegal and invalid. 8. Mr. Shukla appearing for the other side does not raise much controversy about the factual assertions of the Petitioner. His submission, however, is based on some legal propositions. It is submitted by Mr. Shukla that the Petitioner was never promoted as Assistant Teacher of Senion Basic School. She was only transferred. It is stated that her appointment as Assistant Teacher in Primary Pathshala could be made directly and she was qualified for the said post. For the post of Headmistress she was not qualified and she could not be promoted in 1970 as Headmistress of the Primary Pathshala though the post of Headmistress is to be filled by promotion from the cadre of Assistant Teachers of Primary Pathshala. The post of Headmistress of Primary Pathshala carries a higher pay scale. She did not fulfil the requirements of having the requisite teaching experience for being appointed as Headmistress, therefore, her promotion as Headmistress was not in accordance with the rules. She was offered the post of Headmistress in the year 1983, which she declined to accept. It is submitted that if she now accepts to become the Headmistress of Primary Pathshala with effect from 1983 she will get the higher grade and salary with effect from 1983 on wards, which may eventually pave way for her to become Assistant Teacher in Junior Basic School. It is submitted that if she now accepts to become the Headmistress of Primary Pathshala with effect from 1983 she will get the higher grade and salary with effect from 1983 on wards, which may eventually pave way for her to become Assistant Teacher in Junior Basic School. It is next contended that Assistant Teacher in Junior High School is appointed by promotion from among the headmasters or Headmistress of Primary Schools, as the case may be, and in special circumstances direct recruitment is made to the said post. The Petitioner was not eligible for being appointed as Headmistress as she did not have five years teaching experience as prescribed under the rules. Under Rule 15 of the Basic Education Teachers Service Rules, 1981 direct recruitment can be made to the post of Assistant Teachers in Junior High School if the qualified persons under the rules are not available. However, para 30 of the writ petition, in which the Petitioner has named some persons, who have been promoted as Assistant Teachers in Senior Basic Schools, has not been specifically denied on this point. 9. The Petitioner's appointment as Assistant Teacher in Junior Basic School on 17-1-1970 is not denied. She being qualified for the said post is also not denied. She having been posted to the post of Headmistress on 2-10-1970 is also not denied. Her transfer to the Senior Basic School as Assistant Teacher is also not denied. On the basis of her experience it is stated that she has not acquired the status of Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School. It is stated that she was not at all promoted to this post. The legality of her promotion to the post of Headmistress is also questioned. 10. It is too late in the day for the Respondents to submit that the Petitioner was not eligible in 1970 to be promoted to the post of Headmistress in the Primary Pathshala. Mr. Shukla submits that some officers have showered undue favour on the Petitioner. Assuming that to be true, it cannot be contended now that her promotion as Headmistress in the year 1970 was bad. At no stage any objection was raised by the Respondents up to 30-8-1991 to the promotion of the Petitioner as Headmistress of Primary Pathshala. Mr. Shukla submits that some officers have showered undue favour on the Petitioner. Assuming that to be true, it cannot be contended now that her promotion as Headmistress in the year 1970 was bad. At no stage any objection was raised by the Respondents up to 30-8-1991 to the promotion of the Petitioner as Headmistress of Primary Pathshala. They seem to have accepted that position and treating her eligible for being appointed as Assistant Teacher in Senior Basic School, transferred her to Senior Basic School as Assistant Teacher. This also happened on 25-11-1970. From 25-11-1970 to 31-8-1991 there was no objection to the Petitioner's continuance on the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School. She was not given the pay scale of that post for which she was contesting her claim throughout, she was discharging the functions of the Assistant Teacher for more than 20 years in senior Basic School. 11. It is true that Rule 8 of the Rules refer to academic qualification of Assistant Teacher of Primary Pathshala and also lays down five years teaching experience for being appointed as Headmistress in Primary Pathshala. So far as the Petitioner's academic qualifications is concerned, she had the academic qualifications for being appointed as Assistant Teacher in Primary Pathshala, thereafter she was promoted as Headmistress in the Primary Pathshala. These rules are framed in 1981. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that these rules would not apply retrospectively but he seems to have relied on the said rules in the writ petition. Therefore, he will not be heard to say that these rules would not apply to the Petitioner. Under Rule 15 of the Rules direct recruitment for Headmistress can be made if qualified persons under the rules are not available. That would mean that five years teaching experience in Rule 8(3) for Assistant Teacher for being eligible for promotion as Headmaster/Headmistress of Primary Pathshala is not an absolute rule, which does not admit of any exception. This rule could operate initially with regard to five years teaching experience but if a candidate is appointed as Headmistress without having the requisite, teaching experience and promoted as Asstt. Teacher in Junior High School The effect is that the requirement of five years teaching experience for being appointed as Headmistress in the case of the Petitioner was diluted by the Respondents in 1970. Teacher in Junior High School The effect is that the requirement of five years teaching experience for being appointed as Headmistress in the case of the Petitioner was diluted by the Respondents in 1970. They did not raise their little finger to question the status of the Petitioner to hold the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School for 20 years. Now all of a sudden they have woken up from deep slumber and directed that the Petitioner be reverted as Assistant Teacher in Primary Pathshala, which has the effect of reducing her salary and grade. If a certain position with regard to the Petitioner has been permitted to remain operative for little over 20 years, it cannot be annulled by a stroke of pen all of a sudden to the detriment of the Petitioner, who has in the meantime acquired certain right under service law in respect of salary and seniority. The persons named by her in para 30 of the writ petition have since been promoted as Assistant Teachers in Junior High School and if the Petitioner was allowed to remain in Primary Pathshala as Assistant Teacher she also would have been promoted about 15 years back to the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School. Her academic qualification and competence to hold the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School is not questioned. Her status is challenged on the ground that in 1970 she could not be promoted as Headmistress of Primary Pathshala because she had no teaching experience of five years. This objection is raised now in August. 1991. It will be unjust and inequitable to allow the Respondents to raise this objection at this late stage. 12. Five years teaching experience which is required for holding a post of Headmistress of a Primary Pathshala, which is a feeding cadre of Assistant Teachers for Junior High Schools seems to have been dispensed with and lack of five years teaching experience in 1970 would not disentitle the Petitioner to hold the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School. Five years teaching experience which is required for holding a post of Headmistress of a Primary Pathshala, which is a feeding cadre of Assistant Teachers for Junior High Schools seems to have been dispensed with and lack of five years teaching experience in 1970 would not disentitle the Petitioner to hold the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School. Even if her promotion to the post of Headmistress or to the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School was defective in 1970, that defect will not continue and persist upto August, 1991, She has gained sufficient experience in 20 years to hold the post of Assistant Teacher in the Junior High School and has in fact been discharging the functions of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School. Therefore, her reversion as Assistant Teacher in the Primary Pathshala is absolutely invalid and arbitrary. 13. The order of the Respondent No. 2 by which he has directed, on 30-4-1990, to grant her the grade of Assistant Teacher of Junior High School has not been withdrawn. It is still in force but the impugned order in this writ petition has the effect of nullifying the said order. In favour of the Petitioner there was a recommendation after enquiry that she was entitled to draw the pay scale of Assistant Teacher of Junior High School. On the basis of that recommendation that order was issued in her favour which remained unimplemented. The recommendation and the order based on that recommendation seems to be consistent with the principle of 'equal pay for equal work'. There was no reason to deny her the pay scale of Assistant Teacher of Junior High School, when she was in fact working as such. 14. Realising this difficulty Mr. Shukla submitted that from the date she was transferred to Junior High School as Assistant Teacher till 31-8-1991/-7-9-1991, she may be allowed to draw the pay scale of Assistant Teacher of Junior High School as she has been working and discharging her duties on the post of Assistant Teacher of the Junior High School but he sought to defend the reversion order only on the ground of lack of five years teaching experience, which the Petitioner had initially in 1970 when she was promoted to the post of Headmistress in Primary Pathshala. 15. I have considered the arguments of Mr. Shukla carefully. 15. I have considered the arguments of Mr. Shukla carefully. I am unable to agree with his submissions. For the reason that the Petitioner's promotion as Assistant Teacher of Junior High School cannot be undone or upset after more than 20 years by virtue of the impugned orders and she cannot be reverted back to Primary Pathshala as Assistant Teacher after having permitted her to discharge the functions of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School for more than 20 years. Lack of teaching experience initially would not debar her to hold the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High School which she can hold because she has the academic qualification to hold the said post. Nothing is said on the teaching capability of the Petitioner as Assistant Teacher in Junior High School. Lack of teaching experience of five years initially in 1970 is sought to be pressed as a ground for refusing the relief to the Petitioner. If the Respondents have permitted certain thing to remain in operation for more than 20 years they cannot now turn round and upset that position to the manifest disadvantage of the Petitioner after such a pretty long time. Twenty years time is most valuable and considerable period in the life time of an employee. Right accrued to the Petitioner without any objection from the opposite side for the last more than twenty years cannot be set at naught arbitrarily in 1991. 16. For the reasons stated above, I am of the opinion that both the writ petitions filed by the Petitioner deserves to be allowed. Accordingly I allow the writ petitions and grant the following reliefs to the Petitioner : (i) the impugned order dated 7-9-1991, in which a mention of letter dated 31-8-1991 is given, is hereby quashed as being invalid, arbitrary and unjust ; (ii) The Respondents are directed by a writ of mandamus to treat the Petitioner as Assistant Teacher in Junior High School and allow her the pay scale and grade of Assistant Teacher from the date of her transfer to Junior High School i.e. from 25-11-1970 onwards and pay her the difference of pay. They are further directed to implement the order dated 30-4-1990 passed by the Respondent No. 2; (iii) The Respondents are directed to allow the Petitioner to discharge her duties as Assistant Teacher in Junior High School and consider her for future promotion also as and when she is eligible for the same and not to terminate her services except without following the procedure established by law; (iv) The Respondents are further directed to settle the Petitioner's claim on account of arrears of her salary as Assistant Teacher of Junior High School and pay her the difference of pay within a period of four months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before the Respondents by the Petitioner. The Respondents are also directed to give the Petitioner the pay scale and grade of Assistant Teacher of Junior High School and pay her salary month by month as admissible to her under rules; and (v) The Petitioner shall be entitled to get the [costs of these two writ petitions which I quantify at the rate of Rs. 250/- in each writ petition, in all Rs 500/- in two writ petitions, from the Respondents.