IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-14924-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision: 14.05.2026 Sandeep Bali ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Punjab and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present: Mr. H.P.S. Ghuman, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Pratibha Bali, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Abhilaksh Gaind, Advocate, Mr. Rakesh Roy, Advocate and Ms. Priya Jarial, Advocate for respondent No.5.

*******

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL)

1. Present civil writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of the order dated 30.04.2026 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent No.5, vide which the petitioner has been demoted from the post of Safai Mate to Safai Sewak.

CONTENTIONS

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner was initially appointed as Safai Sewak in the Municipal Council, Nabha on 12.01.2009. Vide order dated 12.01.2011 (Annexure P-1), he was assigned the duty of a Temporary Safai Mate. Further, respondent No.5- Municipal Council passed a resolution No.105 dated 24.04.2022, which was approved by the General House for promoting the petitioner to the post of Safai Mate on a permanent basis. The said resolution was sent to respondent No.3 i.e. Director, Local Government Department, Punjab, who, vide letter dated 16.09.2022 (Annexure P-2), directed to take action keeping in view the seniority list and government instructions. Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted by order dated 03.10.2022 (Annexure P-5).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the impugned demotion order dated 30.04.2026 (Annexure P-7) was passed without conducting any inquiry, without issuing show-cause notice and without following the principles of natural justice. He further argues that there is no provision under the Municipal Council Act for such demotion and respondent No.5 could not have unilaterally recalled the order dated 03.10.2022, which was based on a unanimous decision of the General House and approval of the Director. He submits that the petitioner has been working as Safai Mate since 2012 and his work is satisfactory without any complaint.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.5 submits that the impugned order dated 30.04.2026 was passed by respondent No.5, after coming to its notice that promotion of the petitioner to the post of Safai Mate was made in gross violation of the seniority list and government instructions.

Learned counsel further refers to the impugned order (Annexure P-7) and submits that the Director, Local Government Department, Punjab, vide letter dated 16.09.2022 (Annexure P-2), had specifically directed that action be taken keeping in mind the roster point and seniority list as per the rules/instructions of the government. The promotion of the petitioner, who was admittedly junior to forty five (45) other eligible Safai Sewaks, bypassed the seniority list. This was a mistake that the respondents were well within their rights to correct. He argues that the petitioner was not holding the post of Safai Mate as a matter of right and the correction of an illegal order does not require a full-fledged inquiry or a show-cause notice, when the illegality is apparent on the face of the record. OBSERVATION & ANALYSIS

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance.

6. The primary issue for consideration before this Court is whether respondent No.5 was justified in passing the impugned order dated 30.04.2026 (Annexure P-7), demoting the petitioner from the post of Safai Mate to Safai Sewak, on the ground that his initial promotion was granted in violation of the seniority list and government instructions and whether such action was vitiated for want of an inquiry or adherence to the principles of natural justice.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India and another Vs. Narendra Singh, 2008(2) S