Amendments to service rules introducing new conditions for confirmation are prospective in nature and cannot be applied retrospectively to the detriment of an employee promoted under previous rules, unless the amendment is purely clarificatory or curative.

****

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral)

CM-350-CWP-2026

The present application has been filed under Section 151 of CPC for placing on record the written statement on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4 along with Annexures R-4/1 to R-4/8, to the captioned petition. In view of the grounds mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, written statement filed on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4 along with Annexures R-4/1 to R-4/8 are ordered to be taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Registry is directed to place the same at an appropriate place.

MAIN

1. The 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 letter dated 02.07.2025 (Annexure P-9) issued by respondent No.2, vide which promotion of the petitioner to the post of Clerk has been withheld on the ground that he did not pass the English language typing test and the order dated 10.07.2025 (Annexure P-10) issued by respondent No.4, whereby the petitioner is being compelled to pass the English language typing test. Further, it is prayed to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the official respondents to declare successful completion of probation period of the petitioner and to refix his pay along with all the consequential benefits.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Chowkidar on compassionate grounds in the year 2009 and was subsequently promoted to the post of Clerk on 10.03.2015 under the Punjab Market Committees (Class-III) Service Rules, 1989. The said promotion was subject to completion of a probation period of two years and further subject to the condition of passing the Punjabi typing test within a period of one year. It is contended that the Rules, as applicable at the time of promotion, did not prescribe any requirement of passing an English typing test.

2.1 It is further submitted that although the petitioner could not clear the Punjabi typing test within the stipulated period, he ultimately qualified the same on 21.02.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner requested the respondents to declare his probation as successfully completed and to grant him all consequential benefits. However, the respondents, in July 2025, raised an objection requiring the petitioner to pass an English typing test in terms of the amendment introduced in the said Rules in the year 2017. Learned counsel contends that the said amendment cannot be applied retrospectively to the case of the petitioner, as he had already been promoted on 10.03.2015, much prior to the amendment.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4 submits that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Clerk on 10.03.2015 subject to the condition of passing the Punjabi typing test within a period of one year. It is contended that the petitioner failed to fulfil the said condition within the stipulated time and, in the interregnum, the Punjab Market Committees (Class-III) Service Rules, 1989 were amended in the year 2017, introducing a requirement of passing the English typing test for the post of Clerk.

3.1 On this premise, it is argued that since the petitioner did not clear the requisite typing test within the prescribed period, the amended provisions would become applicable to his case. It is, however, not disputed that the petitioner has since passed the Punjabi typing test on 21.02.2024.

4. I