JUDGMENT :

Harpreet Singh Brar, J. (Oral)

The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 04.10.2024 (Annexure P-5) issued by respondent No.2 whereby the retirement order dated 30.09.2024 (Annexure P-4) was withdrawn qua respondent No.4.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Additional Director with Punjab Energy Development Agency (hereinafter 'PEDA'). The next promotional designation is that of the Director for which only one post exists, as duly mentioned in Annexure A of the Punjab Energy Development Agency Service Rules, 2016 (hereinafter 'PEDA Rules'). The petitioner has three years of experience in regular service and outstanding/very good ACRs in the last four years. The erstwhile Director- respondent No.4 retired on 30.09.2024 as he attained the age of 58 years. However, his retirement order was illegally rescinded vide impugned order dated 04.10.2024 (Annexure P-5), in spite of the fact that the petitioner was eligible for the post of Director at the time of retirement of respondent No.4. Hence, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition, seeking quashing of impugned order dated 04.10.2024 (Annexure P-5).

CONTENTIONS

2. Learned Senior counsel inter alia contends that respondent No.4 had retired on 30.09.2024 as a Director of PEDA as he attained the age of superannuation i.e. 58 years. Pursuant to the same, he was relieved vide order dated 30.09.2024 (Annexure P-4) and all retiral dues including gratuity and leave encashment were deposited in his account. However, vide impugned order dated 04.10.2024 issued by the Administrative Secretary of the Department of New and Renewable Energy Resource, respondent No.4 was granted an extension from 30.09.2024 to 29.09.2025, with the approval of the Chief Minister, Punjab. Earlier as well, the petitioner was given the additional charge of Director, PEDA, as respondent No.4 was on leave up to 30.06.2023, vide order dated 12.06.2023 (Annexure P-9).

3. Further, learned Senior counsel refers to the PEDA Rules and submits that as per Rule 5, the appointing authority for the posts of Director, Additional Director and Joint Director is the Chairman. Additionally, Rule 6 prescribes the method of promotion and specifically states that promotions shall be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. Rule 6(4) also prescribes the minimum educational qualifications and experience requirements for the purpose of promotion, which are elaborated in Appendix B to the Rules. For the post of Director, the prescribed qualification is Graduation in Engineering or MBA with three years satisfactory regular service as Additional Director, and the petitioner satisfies all these prerequisites. He further draws the attention of this Court to Rule 12(d) which states that any issue not specifically covered by the Rules will be covered by the Punjab Civil Services Rules (hereinafter 'PCSR'). Learned Senior counsel further refers to notification dated 02.03.2020(Annexure P-6) whereby instructions were issued by the Government of Punjab, regarding granting extension of service to the employees beyond the date of retirement on superannuation. A perusal of Clause 4 of the said notification would indicate that Rule 3.26(a) of the Punjab Civil Service Rules, Volume I, Part 1 has been amended to state that extension of service can only be granted under exceptional circumstances, if the State Government considers it necessary and expedient in the public interest. Moreover, the proviso therein specifically calls for recording reasons for extension of service in writing. Learned senior counsel contends that a perusal of the impugned order would clearly indicate that not only has the extension been granted by an officer other than the appointing authority, the same has also been done without assigning any reasons. Further, the explanation given in the w