203 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : 10.04.2026

1. CWP No.25332 of 2016(O&M)

Tilak Raj ...Petitioner Versus Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and others ...Respondents Present: Mr. Barjesh Mittal, Advocate and Mr. Simranpreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Additional Standing Counsel and Mr. Manpreet Singh, Advocate for the respondents.

*****

2. CWP No.3723 of 2017(O&M) Naib Singh ...Petitioner Versus Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and others ...Respondents Present: Mr. Pawan Kumar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Vidushi Kumar, Advocate, Ms. Seema Rani, Advocate, Mr. Anubhav Jakhar, Advocate and Ms. Charanjeet Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Additional Standing Counsel and Mr. Manpreet Singh, Advocate for the respondents.

*****

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA *****

DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA, J. (Oral)

1. This order shall dispose of CWP No. 25332 of 2016 and CWP No. 3723 of 2017, as an identical issue is involved in both the cases.

2. For the facility of reference, the facts are being taken from CWP No.3723 of 2017.

3. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondents, i.e., Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh, in not considering his case for promotion to the post of Meter Inspector in terms of agenda items dated 01.03.2016 (Annexure P-3) and 08.07.2016 (Annexure P-4). The petitioner has further prayed for issuance of a direction to the respondents to consider his case for promotion to the post of Meter Inspector in light of the aforesaid agenda items.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially engaged as Helper/Beldar in the U.T. Administration Chandigarh in the year 1979. Thereafter, he was promoted on the post of Meter Reader on 07.03.1994. It is not disputed that the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh, was constituted in the year 1994 and the petitioner was transferred to the Municipal Corporation in the year 1996. As per the petitioner, he was placed at Serial No.3 in the seniority list of Meter Reader (Regular) dated 27.07.2016 (Annexure P- 1), issued by respondent No. 4. The promotion from the post of Meter Reader to Meter Inspector is governed by the Regulations framed by the respondent-Corporation under Section 75 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976, in the year 2012, called as the “Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh Service Regulations, 2012” (hereinafter referred to as the “Regulations of 2012”) (Annexure P-2) which were notified on 17.08.2012. As per the said “Regulations of 2012”, a Meter Reader is eligible for promotion to the post of Meter Inspector only if he/she is placed in Technician Grade-I and has completed 08 years of regular service in the cadre after appointment. The relevant extract of the “Regulations of 2012” is reproduced hereinbelow:-

The case of the petitioner was included in agenda items dated 01.03.2016 (Annexure P-3) and 08.07.2016 (Annexure P-4), which were proposed to be placed before the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short, “DPC”) for consideration for promotion and approval. However, no decision was taken on the said agenda items. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 28.02.2017, though he was granted an extension of two years thereafter. Aggrieved by the non-consideration of the case of petitioner for promotion by the respondents despite his name being recommended in the agenda items, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition.

5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that once the case of the petitioner had been included in the agenda items dated 01.03.2016 (Annexure P-3) and 08.07.2016 (Annexure P-4) and recommended for consideration before the DPC prior to his retirement for promotion to the post of Meter Inspector, he has acquired a right to be considered for promotion on the post of Meter Inspector. He further submits that similarly situated employees, namely