IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-32114-2025 (O&M)

Date of decision: 31.10.2025 Harpreet Singh and another ....Petitioners Versus Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. H.S. Saini, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Shwas Bajaj, Advocate for Ms. Palika Monga, Advocate for the respondents.

HARPREET SINGH BRAR J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, for quashing of impugned order dated 25.09.2025 passed by the respondent/Corporation whereby the claim of the petitioners for appointment against the post of Assistant Lineman in pursuance of CRA No.295 of 2019 has been rejected. Further a writ of mandamus has been sought, directing the respondent/Corporation to consider the claim of the petitioners for appointment to the post of Assistant Lineman in pursuance of the advertisement CRA No.295 of 2019 and release all consequential benefits w.e.f. the date when the candidates lower in merit than the petitioners are appointed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, contend that petitioner No.1 belongs to BC category whereas petitioner No.2 belongs to a General category and they possess the qualification of ITI diploma in electrician trade. They have further undergone 02 years of apprenticeship in the trade of Lineman from Bhakhra Beas Management Board, Nangal from 19.09.2001 to 18.09.2003. Thus, in terms of Punjab State Electricity Board Technical Services Class-III Regulations, 1996 (in short, ‘the Regulations of 1996’), both the petitioners are fully eligible and qualified for appointment to the post of Assistant Lineman. The essential qualification is provided in regulations of 1996. On 03.10.2019, the respondent/Corporation issued an advertisement (Annexure P-6) for filling up 3500 posts of Assistant Lineman. Out of 3500 posts, 328 posts were reserved for BC category. The respondent/Corporation in complete disregard to the statutory Regulations of 1996 has inserted a condition vide Clause 6(iv) in the advertisement providing preference to the candidates having apprenticeship in the trade of lineman from Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL/PSTCL or erstwhile PSEB). The recruitment rules only prescribes the essential qualification and do not provide any preference for apprenticeship. As such, preference clause of the apprenticeship inserted in the advertisement without any regulatory mandate is not enforceable. Both the petitioners participated in the selection process and petitioner No.1 was placed at Serial No.1092 of the select list for 328 seats under BC category whereas petitioner No.2 was placed at Serial No.3366. Many other similarly situated candidates were not considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Lineman by the respondent/Corporation against the advertisement issued in the year 2017 and 2019. Similarly situated candidates filed a petition i.e. CWP-24773-2018 titled as Harish Kumar v. State of Punjab and others which was allowed by the Coordinate Bench on 27.04.2023 (Annexure P-8) by holding the action of the respondent/Corporation to be illegal and arbitrary by providing preference to the apprenticeship by ignoring the merit. A direction was issued to the respondent/Corporation to consider the claim of the petitioner therein and grant them appointment from the date from which the persons junior to them in the merit list were appointed. Further, some candidates namely Jangsher Singh and Narinder Pal Singh and others approached this Court by filing CWP-10637-2020 and CWP-6577-2020 by relying upon the judgment of Harish Kumar's case (supra) which was decided on 26.05.2023 and 07.07.2023 (Annexures P-9 and P-10 respectively) and, this Court disposed of the said writ petitions in terms of the judgment rendered in Harish Kumar's case (supra). As such, the case of the petitioners