M.M.Kumar, J.

1. The instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing order dated 22.3.2006 (P-4) passed by the Chief Secretary of the respondent-State reverting the petitioner from HCS (Executive Branch) to his substantive post of Block Development & Panchayat Officer.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working as Block Development & Panchayat Officer when his name was considered for appointment to HCS (Executive Branch) through Register C. The petitioner was found suitable and was appointed in accordance with the rules known as Punjab Civil Services (Executive Branch) Rules, 1930 (for brevity the Rules) (as applicable to the State of Haryana). According to Rule 21 of the Rules, the petitioner was required to pass higher standard departmental examination within a period of two years. The departmental examination was held in December 2006, June 2004, December 2004 and May - June 2005. The petitioner was able to pass Group-D Hindi subject with higher standard in the examination held in December, 2003. He has also passed Group C-II Local Funds Paper with higher standard in the examination held in June, 2004 and Group-A Criminal Law, Group-A-II Civil Law, Group-B Revenue Law with higher standard in the examination held in May-June, 2005. In other words, the petitioner has passed all papers in required higher standard except Group-CI Financial Rules which he had passed with lower standard. According to the rules, a candidate belonging to HCS has to pass Group-CI Financial Rules also in higher standard. As the period of two years was over, the petitioner made a request that he may be permitted to appear in the examination which was to be held in January, 2006 in respect of the Financial Rules paper. The petitioner was not allowed to appear.

3. On 24.1.2006 the petitioner was issued a show cause notice (P-2) proposing his reversion to the post of Block Development & Panchayat Officer. The petitioner duly replied the show cause notice on 14.2.2006 (P-3). However, the Chief Secretary found the explanation unsatisfactory and ordered the reversion of the petitioner by holding that the departmental examination was required to be passed within total four chances which had already been availed of by the petitioner. The operative part of the order reads as under:

3. Whereas in terms of Rule 21 of the said Rules, Shri Suresh Kumar was required to pass the Departmental Examination by the higher standard within two years from the date of his appointment to the HCS (EB) further in terms of Rules 21 of the said rules read with Rule 1 of the rule ibid for the departmental examination of the Assistant Commissioner or Extra Assistant Commissioner in Haryana, a member of this service can avail total 4 chances even beyond the period of two years, if the departmental examination is not conducted twice a year regularly.

4. Whereas consequent upon Shri Suresh Kumar failure to pass the departmental examination by the higher standard, as stated above, a notice was issued to him vide Memorandum No. 41/8/2005-CS(II) dated 24.1.2006 for termination of his service and he was given opportunity of showing cause against the action proposed to be taken.

5. ...

6. ...

7. Shri Suresh Kumar could not pass the departmental examination by the higher standard within the prescribed period of two years after availing the four chances.

8. Now, therefore, the Governor of Haryana is pleased to revert Shri Suresh Kumar, from the HCS (Ex. Br.) to his parent Department i.e. Development and Panchayats Department with immediate effect under Rule 21 of the Punjab Civil Services (Ex. Branch) Rules, 1930.

4. The case of the petitioner has been opposed principally by insisting on Rule 21 of the Rules which provides that if a member of the service fails to pass higher standard departmental examination within a period of two years, then his services are to be terminated. It has further been pointed out that the departmental ex