IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 09.02.2026 Ranjit Singh ....Petitioner Versus Union of India and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI ----

Present: Mr. Arvinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Satish Saini, Senior Panel Counsel for respondent No.1 – UOI.

Dr. Deepak Jindal, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4.

****

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

1. In the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned order dated 13.02.2018 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal), by which, the claim of the petitioner that vide order dated 08.03.2016, for the promotion to the post of Junior Telecom Officer, he has not been given the benefit of relaxation for which the reserved category candidates were entitled for, has been rejected.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Rules which were applicable on the date when the vacancy became available are to be seen and not the Rules on the date when the consideration for promotion for the same took place keeping in view the fact th