IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 19.02.2026 TRIPTA BANGA AND ORS ...Petitioners Versus PGIMER AND ORS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present:- Mr. Anil K. Lamdharia, Advocate with Ms. Roopse Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.

*****

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI , J. (ORAL)

1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned order dated 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’), by which, the promotion of the petitioners has been stayed.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners argues that without the petitioners being made party in the Original Application filed before the Tribunal, their promotions to post of Junior Nursing Officer have been stayed and that too, without giving them an opportunity to be heard and a chance to rebut the contentions, which were being raised at the hands of the applicants in Original Application before the Tribunal. Learned counsel for the petitioners further argues that in any circumstance, the benefit of promotion admissible to a beneficiary could not have been stayed but still the same have been stayed despite the fact that the PGIMER, before the passing of the impugned order dated 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-12) had brought to the notice of the Tribunal the quantifiable data to support their claim for promotion of the reserved category candidate.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Avinit Avasthi, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. Barjesh Mittal, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.3 to 12. Learned counsel for the respondents submit that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal does not call for any interference by this Court as there is no perversity or illegality in the same.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file with their able assistance.

6. It is a settled principle of law that no order causing prejudice to anyone can be passed without hearing such aggrieved/affected personnel. In the present case, it has escaped from the notice of the Tribunal that the promotions of the reserved category candidates have been stayed though none of the such reserved category candidates, whose case was presented before the Departmental Promotion Committee was even made party before the Tribunal. In the absence of any such personnel being party to the Original Application, who was to be affected by the outcome of the Original Application, the Tribunal should not have restrained such promotions as it is also a settled principle of law that no order can be passed or made applicable upon the parties, who are not before the Court.

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 to 12 concedes that the petitioners herein, who are affected by the interim order dated 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Tribunal were not made parties in the Original Application. That being so, once the impugned order 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Tribunal affects the personnel, who have not been made parties, the said order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law, hence, the said order dated 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-12) passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the promotions of the petitioners, who were not parties before the Tribunal, cannot be stayed but any promotion so made vide said order will be subject to the outcome of the Original Application.

8. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

( HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI )

JUDGE ( VIKAS SURI )

February 19, 2026 JUDGE harish Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No