IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 16.04.2026 Hari Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Chanderdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, Addl. AG, Punjab.

Mr. Bikramjit Singh Patwalia, Advocate for respondent No.4.

****

KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)

1. Through the instant writ petition, cast under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a challenge is thrown to the order dated 03.12.1999 (Annexure P-5), passed by respondent No.2, wherethrough, the petitioner has been reverted from the post of Senior Assistant, and the respondent No.4, who was junior to the petitioner, was promoted in violation of the Division Bench judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.376-379 of 1999 decided on 24.08.1999, titled ‘Saroj Rani vs. State of Punjab’ 1999 (6) SCC

637

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while referring to the seniority list (Annexure P-3/T), submitted that in the seniority list of Assistant Grade Examination passed Clerks/Senior Clerks/Junior Assistants, the name of the petitioner figured at Serial No.40, whereas, the name of the respondent No.4, was mentioned at Serial No.59, and she has been promoted to the post of Assistant, whereas, the petitioner has not been promoted to the said post. He submits that the petitioner was duly qualified and cleared the examination prior to occurrence of the said post on 02.09.1994, and therefore, his candidature is required to be considered along with his junior candidates.

3. In order to lend vigour to his arguments, he has placed reliance upon the Annexure P-1/T, which is a news article published in the local newspaper i.e. ‘Daily Ajeet Jalandhar’, wherein, by way of publishing it was informed that the result for the post of Senior Assistant Grade Examination, conducted by the Punjab Govt., on 06.06.1994, has been declared, and total 671 candidates had appeared for the said examination, out of which, 200 candidates have passed the said examination, and 133 candidates are required to re-appear. The roll numbers of the candidates were also mentioned in the published news item.

4. Before this Court examine the sole submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is imperative to have a glimpse upon the impugned order.

5. As per the impugned order, the petitioner along with some other co-employees, have been reverted to the post of Junior Assistant, who were promoted to the post of Senior Assistant, on qualifying the Assistant Grade Examination, subject to final judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Saroj Rani (supra) case. The relevant is extracted hereinafter :-

“In pursuance of the instructions contained in Govt. circular letter No. 6/30/95/IPPI/11182 dated 15.9.99 coupled with the judgment dated 24.8.99 in C.A. Nos. 11660-61 of 1995, 3315-16 of 1997, 1329 of 1999 & C.A. 4688-91/1990 @ SLP (C) No 376/379/99 the following Clerks/Senior Clerks/Junior Assistants who were promoted to the rank of Senior Assistants on their qualifying the Assistant Grade Examination, vide 0/0 NO. 782/EIII dated 26.11.98, No.783/EIII dt. 26.11.98 & No. 784/EIII dated 27.1.98 subject to the final judgment of the Apex Court are hereby reverted with immediate effect in pursuance of conditions laid down in their promotion orders referred to above.”

6. It is imperitive to note here that the said SLP No.376-379 of 1999, was finally disposed of by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, through a verdict drawn on 24.08.1999, and the following directions were passed therein :-

“(1) All vacancies on the post of Assistant/Senior Assistants prior to 21st January, 1991 are to be filled up by those who qualified by passing the examination and exemptees would have no claim on such vacancies.

(2) All vacancies after 21st January, 1991 shall be filled in the ratio of 70 per cent and 30 per cent between exemptees and qualifiers in the examination, respectively, for each year in