219 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DECIDED ON:30.10.2025 O. P. MALIK .....PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL Present: Mr. S.K. Malik, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl A.G.,Haryana *****

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

1. Prayer The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Articles

226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing of seniority list dated 09.08.2018 (Annexure P-11) to the extent it shows him at serial No. 80 below his alleged juniors, namely Sh. Suresh Kumar at serial No. 21, and further for directing the respondents to grant him promotion as Sub Divisional Engineer (SDE) w.e.f. 20.07.2011, i.e. from the date his alleged juniors were promoted, with all consequential benefits, as well as for issuance of directions to grant him look-after charge (LAC) of the post of Executive Engineer w.e.f. 12.06.2018.

2. Brief Facts The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Engineer (Civil) in the Public Health Engineering Department, Haryana, on 30.11.1980 on an ad hoc basis. His services were later regularised with effect from 01.11.1986 and subsequently confirmed. Two of his colleagues, Sh. Rohtash Singh Sangwan and Sh. Suresh Kumar Goel, were appointed on ad hoc basis on 01.01.1981 and 02.01.1981 respectively and were also regularised on the same date. The petitioner claims seniority over both on the basis of his earlier date of initial appointment.

While in service, the petitioner was proceeded against departmentally under Rule 7 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1987. Vide order dated 10.03.2010, he was awarded the punishment of recovery of 30% of the loss to the State exchequer and stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect. The said punishment was subsequently modified by the Governor of Haryana on 20.07.2011, reducing it to stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect. Another chargesheet issued to the petitioner that resulted in a penalty of censure vide order dated 16.05.2012.

The petitioner was promoted to the post of Sub Divisional Engineer (SDE) vide order dated 14.05.2014, and on representation, he was granted deemed-date promotion w.e.f. 16.08.2013 to bring him at par with his junior, Sh. Panna Lal, who had been promoted on that date. The petitioner’s grievance is that his juniors, including Sh. Suresh Kumar Goel and Sh. Rohtash Singh Sangwan, were promoted earlier while the petitioner was granted promotion at a later stage despite being senior. He further assails the seniority list dated 09.08.2018, wherein he is shown at serial number 80, whereas his juniors are placed higher, and he also seeks consideration for look after charge of the post of Executive Engineer, which was granted to his junior Sh. Suresh Kumar Goel vide order dated 12.06.2018.

Hence, this petition.

3. Contentions Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned seniority list dated 09.08.2018 (Annexure P-11) is patently illegal and arbitrary to the extent it shows the petitioner at serial number 80 while placing his juniors, namely Sh. Suresh Kumar Goel and Sh. Rohtash Singh Sangwan, much higher in seniority. It was urged that the petitioner had been appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) on 30.12.1980 on ad hoc basis, whereas the said juniors were appointed subsequently on 01.01.1981 and 02.01.1981 respectively.

It was further argued that the order of regularization dated

23.12.1991 itself clearly stipulated that the inter se seniority was to be determined on the basis of the date of initial ad hoc appointment. Therefore, according to the petitioner, he was senior to both of them in the feeder cadre, and the subsequent placement of his name below them in the seniority list of Sub Divisional Engineers was contrary to the departmental instructions and settled service law.

Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that despite the petitioner being senior, his juniors were prom