##PAGE1##

CWP-2096-2026 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

123

CWP-2096-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision: 28.01.2026

Gopal Singh

....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and others

....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

Present: Mr. Abhimanyu Batra, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Addl. A.G., Haryana

for respondent No.1.

Mr. Prince Singh, Advocate

for respondent No.2.

Mr. R.K. Chaudhary, Advocate

for Mr. Sukhdeep S. Parmar, Advocate

for respondent No.3.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of

the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of

mandamus, directing the respondents to grant notional promotion to the

petitioner to the post of Lineman w.e.f. 30.11.2009 and eventually to the

post of Junior Engineer as per his service record and seniority with all

consequential benefits including seniority. Further prayer has been made

to direct the respondents to grant all consequential service and monetary

benefits flowing from the notional promotion including arrears of salary,

allowances and revision of pension, etc. with interest.

1 of 6

::: Downloaded on - 03-02-2026 22:28:25 :::

CWP-2096-2026 2

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that

the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Lineman (ALM) on

20.10.1997 as discernible from Annexure P-1. In the promotion drives

conducted in the year 2008 and 2009, the petitioner, though senior and

eligible, was ignored while his juniors were promoted. The denial of

promotion was attributed to allegedly missing ACRs, which were due to

administrative lapses of the respondents. An alleged show-cause notice

dated 25.08.2009 (Annexure P-4) was never served upon the petitioner

and the same appeared in his service record only in the year 2011. A

minor penalty of Rs.1,375/- was imposed upon the petitioner without

issuing any notice or opportunity of hearing, which the petitioner paid

under protest on 19.09.2011 (Annexure P-5). The petitioner was

ultimately promoted to the post of Lineman only on 09.03.2012,

resulting in delayed ACP benefits and further promotions. Learned

counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner obtained

information under the RTI Act which clearly indicates that incorrect

entries in the seniority list, including a false reference to a court case

and an erroneous deemed promotion date have been inserted. The

petitioner made several representations seeking promotion and

correction of his service record, which remain unheeded. Learned

counsel for the petitioner further contends that the denial of promotion

based on a non-existent show-cause notice and missing ACRs

attributable to administrative failure violates the principles of natural

justice.

2 of 6

::: Downloaded on - 03-02-2026 22:28:25 :::

CWP-2096-2026 3

3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits

that the right of the petitioner was crystallized in the year 2009,

however, he never agitated his claim until his retirement on 30.04.2023.

Moreover, the petitioner did not possess the essential qualification for

promotion to the post of Junior Engineer as he is only a matriculate,

whereas the prescribed qualification for the said post is matriculation

along with ITI. As such, the claim of the petitioner is highly time-barred

and suffers from the vires of delay and laches.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

record with their able assistance.

5. The primary grievance raised by the petitioner is regarding

alleged denial of promotion and consequential benefits. However, on a

careful consideration of the record, it is evident that the petitioner did

not approach the respondents in a timely manner despite the alleged

right having been crystallized in the year 2009. Further, the petitioner

did not possess the mandatory qualification for promotion to the post of

Junior Engineer as he is only matriculate while the prescribed

qualification is matriculation with ITI.

6. It is trite law that