211-16^th case IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-33034-2018 Date of Decision: 22.09.2025 Pardeep Kumar ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. Dhiraj Chawla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Vikas Arora, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. M.S. Sidhu, Advocate for respondent No.3.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The present civil writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the impugned reversion order dated 06.12.2018 (Annexure P-5) whereby the petitioner has been reverted from the post of Junior Engineer to the post of Surveyor. Further, the petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in the post of Junior Engineer at Improvement Trust, Rajpura with all consequential benefits, including salary and seniority.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. Briefly stated, the petitioner was appointed as a Surveyor on a contract basis with Improvement Trust, Khanna on 27.07.1999. His services were regularized vide order dated 19.03.2012. In 2012, with due permission from the department, the petitioner pursued a Diploma in Civil Engineering from the Karnataka State Open University (hereinafter ‘KSOU’) via Distance Education Mode, which he successfully completed in 2014. Subsequently, the petitioner was transferred from Khanna to Malerkotla and from Malerkotla, the petitioner was transferred to Rajpura.

3. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) vide order dated 03.01.2017 (Annexure P-4) as per the Punjab Trust Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2015 (Annexure P-3) (hereinafter ‘2015 Rules’). The promotion was granted on an ad-hoc stop-gap basis, based on his seniority and over 18 years of experience as a Surveyor, against the required 10 years.

4. Subsequently, following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Orissa Lift Irrigation Corp. Ltd. Vs. Rabi Sankar Patro 2017(4) SCT 683 which declared technical degrees obtained through Distance Education Mode after 2005 as invalid, the respondents issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner and other similarly situated employees. Despite the petitioner’s submission that his promotion was based solely on seniority and experience and not on the strength of the Diploma, the respondent No. 2 passed the impugned reversion order dated 06.12.2018 (Annexure P-5), reverting him to the post of Surveyor.

5. Vide a subsequent order dated 07.12.2018 (Annexure P-6), the petitioner was directed to join the Improvement Trust, Khanna, thereby transferring him from Rajpura, where he and his family were settled. Aggrieved by these orders, the petitioner has approached this Hon’ble Court.

CONTENTIONS

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contended that the promotion to the post of Junior Engineer was based solely on seniority and experience under the 70% quota of the 2015 Rules. The Rules for this quota do not mandate possession of a Diploma. Therefore, the invalidation of his Diploma is irrelevant to his eligibility and promotion. Further, the impugned order is vitiated by non-application of mind as it fails to consider the specific provision under which the petitioner was promoted and erroneously links his reversion to the invalid Diploma. The initial promotion was on a stop-gap ad- hoc basis, and the condition regarding the outcome of court cases was related to the 30% quota (which requires a Diploma), a category not applicable to the petitioner. Furthermore, it is contended that the petitioner has been subjected to double jeopardy, having not only been reverted from his post but also transferred from Rajpura to Khanna, thereby completely uprooting him from his place of posting.

7. Per Contra, learned counsel for the Respondents inter alia contended that the petitioner’s Diploma from KSOU through Distance