IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: February 09, 2026 Ashwani Kumar .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Sanchit Punia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Piyush Khanna, Addl. AG, Haryana.

Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)

1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ or order in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned letter dated 02.01.2026 (Annexure P-5) whereby the tentative ranking list of Engineering Subordinate for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer/Electrical under 12.5% quota has been prepared in complete violation of judgment dated 09.08.2018 passed by this Court in LPA-1515-2015, titled as Sukhdev Singh and others Versus Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited and others (Annexure P-3) and for quashing the impugned action of respondents whereby despite availability of 12 posts and eligible engineering subordinate including petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer/Electrical for the year 2024, respondents failed to prepare the ranking list of period 2024 and during the pendency of the present writ petition, operation of impugned letter dated 02.01.2026 (Annexure P-5) may be stayed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner has been working as a Junior Engineer-I (JE-I) in Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (HVPNL) since 05.08.2004. He acquired the AMIE qualification on 03.10.2016, as is evident from Annexures P-1 and P-2. As per the applicable promotion policy, Junior Engineers-I are eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) against the 12.5% quota after completion of five years of service subsequent to acquiring AMIE/BE qualification. Learned counsel further submits that the respondents have prepared a tentative ranking list dated 02.01.2026 (Annexure P-5), which is in direct violation of the law laid down by a Coordinate Division Bench of this Court in Sukhdev Singh’s case (supra), wherein it has been categorically held that a year-wise ranking list is required to be prepared. Contrary thereto, the respondents have prepared a ranking list for only two previous years, instead of preparing the same for each eligible year. It is further contended that the action of the respondents is arbitrary and mala fide, having been undertaken with an intent to accommodate a select few candidates by artificially restricting the number of available posts to six instead of thirteen. Consequently, grave prejudice has been caused to the petitioner, who is otherwise fully eligible to be considered for promotion for the current period. For redressal of his grievance, the petitioner submitted representations dated 16.01.2026 and 30.01.2026 (Annexures P-7 and P-8), respectively; however, the same have remained unconsidered till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to decide the aforesaid representations by passing a reasoned and speaking order, within a time-bound manner, in accordance with the judgment rendered in Sukhdev Singh’s case (supra).

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Piyush Khanna, learned Additional Advocate General, waives service of notice on behalf of respondent-State, whereas, Mr.Vikrant Pamboo, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3 and submits that they have no objection in case a direction is issued to respondent No.2 to hear and decide respondent No.2 to decide the representations dated 16.01.2026 and 30.01.2026 (Annexures P-7 and P-8) by respondent No.2 by passing a speaking order in a time bound manner in terms of judgment passed in Sukhdev Singh’s case (supra)

5. In view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner with