CWP-8384- IN TH 239 Mohit Bassi Punjab State CORAM: Present : HARPREET 1. 226/227 of th certiorari for (Annexure request for w been rejected 2. was appointe (PSPCL) on Police throug 1 -2025 N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGA CWP Date Bassi VERSUS State Power Corporation Limited (PS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA Mr. Vikas Mohan Gupta, Advoca Mr. Shikhar Sarin, Advocate for REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) The present civil writ petition 7 of the Constitution of India for issu ari for quashing the impugned Mem ure P-19) issued by respondent No t for withdrawal of his resignation a jected. Learned counsel for the petitio pointed as Clerk in the Punjab Sta L) on 28.01.2021. He applied for the p through proper channels after obtain NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH CWP-8384-2025 Date of Decision: January 13, 2026 ....Petitioner SUS ed (PSPCL) and others ...Responden HARPREET SINGH BRAR dvocate for the petitioner. ate for respondents No.1 to 3. etition has been filed under Articles or issuance of a writ in the nature of Memo No. 1249 dated 11.02.2025 ent No. 2, whereby the petitioner’s tion and reinstatement as Clerk has petitioner submits that the petitioner b State Power Corporation Limited r the post of Sub-Inspector in Punjab obtaining a No Objection Certificate 2026 itioner ondents rticles ure of .2025 oner’s k has tioner imited unjab ificate PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8384- (NOC) from on 13.05.202 Police on 17 resignation an on 21.08.202 vide the im Regulation 7. Rule 7.5(5) o applied. He r NCT of Delh and L.R. Pati 3. submits that which is a St embargo of 1972, which to take up Government. approbation that the refere the provision 4. record. 2 -2025 from PSPCL. Upon selection, he su 024, which was accepted w.e.f. on 17.08.2024, but on 20.08.2024, he tion and sought to rejoin PSPCL. He w 08.2024. Despite repeated representa he impugned memo. He contends t tion 7.5(4) of the PSEB Main Service .5(5) of the Punjab Civil Services R . He relies upon judgments of the Hon Delhi vs. Kamlesh Rani Bhatla CIV . Patil vs. Gulbarga University 2023 On the other hand, learned c s that the petitioner’s resignation was is a State Government department, an o of Regulation 7.5(5) of the PSE which prohibits withdrawal of resigna e up appointment under a “body c ment.” He contends that the peti ation and reprobation and cannot be reference to PCS Rules in the impugn visions are pari materia. I have heard learned counsel f he submitted a technical resignation w.e.f. 14.08.2024. He joined Punjab 24, he applied for withdrawal of his . He was relieved from Punjab Police esentations, his request was rejected ends that the case is governed by ervices Regulations, 1972, and not by ices Rules, which has been wrongly he Hon’ble Supreme Court in Govt. of CIVIL APPEAL No 1927 of 2023 023 INSC 796. rned counsel for respondent-PSPCL n was tendered to join Punjab Police, ent, and thus squarely falls under the e PSEB Main Services Regulations, esignation when an employee resigns ody controlled or financed by the e petitioner’s conduct amounts to not be permitted. He further submits impugned memo is inconsequential as nsel for the parties and perused the nation unjab of his Police jected ed by not by ongly t. of 023 SPCL olice, er the tions, esigns y the ts to bmits tial as ed the PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8384- 5. Regulation 7 Regulations, “7.5. ( be wit forfeitu (2) A been appoin Govern (3) Int the tw joining by gra date o period author interes (i) that some c integri resigna circum resigna (ii) tha resigna withdr way im (iii) th the res allowe resigna (iv) tha the ma for wit the sam month; 3 -2025 The core issue is whether the tion 7.5(4) or Regulation 7.5(5) tions, 1972, which reads as under: .5. (1) Resignation from a service o withdrawn in public interest by th rfeiture of past service. ) A resignation shall not entail for en submitted to take up, with pointment, whether temporary overnment where service qualifies fo ) Interruption in service in a case fa e two appointments being at differ ining time permissible under the rul grant of leave of any kind due to th te of relief or by formal condonat riod is not covered by leave due thority may permit a person to with terest on the following conditions, na that the resignation was tendered b me compelling reasons which did n tegrity, efficiency or conduct and th signation has been made as a resu rcumstances which originally co signation; ) that during the period intervening signation became effective and the d thdrawal was made, the conduct of y improper; i) that the period of absence from d e resignation became effective and t lowed to resume duty as a result signation is not more than ninety day ) that the aforementioned period of e manner that the employee concern r withdrawal of resignation within tw e same should as far as possible be p onth; and (v) that the post, which w er the petitioner’s case falls under .5(5) of the PSEB Main Services ice or a post, unless it is allowed to by the appointing authority, entails l forfeiture of past service if it has with proper permission, another ry or permanent, under the es for pension. se falling under sub-rule (2), due to ifferent stations, not exceeding the e rules of transfer, shall be covered to the Government employee on the onation to the extent to which the due to him. (4) The appointing withdraw his resignation in public s, namely:– ed by the Government employee for id not involve any reflection on his d the request for withdrawal of the result of a material change in the compelled him to tender the ning between the date on which the the date from which the request for t of the person concerned was in no om duty between the date on which nd the date on which the person is sult of permission to withdraw the y days; d of ninety days shall be observed in cerned should put in his application in two months of being relieved and be processed within a period of one ch was vacated by the Government under rvices d to tails has ther the e to the ered the the ting blic e for his f the the the the t for n no hich n is he d in tion and one ent PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8384- employ compa (5) Re the ap service private compa Govern Govern 6. the embargo applicable to of PSPCL, a Regulations. fundamental 7. of Regulation - a pr - a co - a bo 8. understood in the State Gov Regulation 7 government d 4 -2025 ployee on the acceptance of h mparable post, is available. ) Request for withdrawal of a resign e appointing authority where a Go rvice or post with a view to taking u ivate commercial company or in mpany wholly or substantially overnment or in or under a body overnment.” The respondent has rejected the bargo under Rule 7.5(5) of PCS Rules ble to government servants. The petit CL, a statutory corporation, and is tions. The impugned memo, while ental legal error in applying the wrong Even assuming the provisions ar ulation 7.5(5) shows it applies to resign a private commercial company, or a corporation/company owned/contr a body controlled/financed by Gove Punjab Police is not a “corporat tood in commercial or statutory terms; te Government engaged in core sovere tion 7.5(5) does not expressly cove ment department. Thus, the embargo d of his resignation or any other esignation shall not be accepted by Government employee resigns his ng up an appointment in or under a r in or under a corporation or lly owned or controlled by the ody controlled or financed by the ted the petitioner’s request relying on Rules, which is similarly worded but e petitioner, however, is an employee nd is governed by its own Service hile quoting PCS Rules, reflects a ong set of rules. ions are pari materia, a closer reading resignation for joining: y, or /controlled by Government, or Government. rporation,” “company,” or “body” as terms; it is a sovereign department of sovereign functions. The language of y cover resignation to join another argo does not apply. ther d by his er a or the the ng on ed but loyee ervice ects a ading dy” as ent of age of nother PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8384- 9. Vs Gulbarga through Justi “16. O the ca Others not a w the po appoin substa differe Furthe Others questio can be confirm 17. In and An interpr with re 5 -2025 A Two Judge Bench of the Hon’ barga University, Gulbarga, 2023 h Justice J.K Maheshwari, observed th 6. On the said issue, the law has be e case of “Ramlal Khurana (dead) thers, (1989) 4 SCC 99”, wherein th t a word of art and it connotes the e post substantively to which he is a pointment of government servant bstantive as he/she cannot hold tw fferent cadres and maintain lien on rther, in the case of “Triveni Shank thers, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 524”, estion of acquisition of lien, this Co n be said to acquire a lien on a nfirmed and made permanent on th . In a 3-Judge Bench judgment in t d Another Vs. S.N. Tiwari and Oth terpreting the word ‘lien’ against th th respect to another post, this Cour “17. It is very well settled tha against the post is appointed only then he acquires a lien ag then alone the lien against the connotes the right of a civ 12substantively to which he government employee over the appointed to another permanen such a case the lien of the emplo post. It may not require a form previous permanent post.”” e Hon’ble Supreme Court in L.R Patil 2023 INSC 796 while speaking ved that, s been well-settled by this Court in ead) by Lrs. Vs. State of Punjab & in this Court observed that ‘lien’ is the right of a civil servant to hold is appointed, meaning thereby, the vant on the said post must be d two posts simultaneously in two on both of them at the same time. ankar Saxena Vs. State of U.P. and 24”, while primarily dealing the s Court has observed that a person n a post only when he has been n that post and not earlier. t in the case of “State of Rajasthan Others, (2009) 4 SCC 700”, while st the post appointed substantively ourt held as thus: d that when a person with a lien ted substantively to another post, n against the latter post. Then and t the previous post disappears. Lien civil servant to hold the post he is appointed. The lien of a r the previous post ends if he is anent post on permanent basis. In mployee shifts to the new permanent formal termination of lien over the Patil aking rt in b & ’ is hold , the be two ime. and the rson been than hile ively lien post, and Lien post f a e is . In nent the PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8384- 10. Police and w could not be six days of improper, the reason (high Regulation 7 unsustainable 11. justice as no arbitrary, dis Constitution 12. another servi accordance w regard may b Singh v State 13. the impugned The respond petitioner and Main Service Amandeep (s 6 -2025 In the present case, the petition and was never confirmed. His lien o not be deemed terminated. Further he ys of his resignation becoming ef er, the post of Clerk was vacant, and (higher appointment). These facto tion 7.5(4). The rejection based on a ainable. Moreover, the impugned memo as no opportunity of hearing was gran ry, discriminatory, and violative of tution of India. It transpires that the petitione r service, is entitled to have his claim ance with the applicable Punjab Civil may be placed on a judgement rende State of Punjab CWP-25469-2025. In view of the above, the prese pugned Memo dated 11.02.2025 (Ann spondents-Corporation is directed t er and pass a speaking order strictly in ervices Regulations, 1972 and the ju ep (supra), after affording him an op etitioner was on probation in Punjab lien on the post of Clerk, therefore, her he applied for withdrawal within ng effective, his conduct was not nt, and he resigned for a compelling factors satisfy the conditions of d on a misapplied legal provision is memo violates principles of natural as granted. The respondent’s action is ive of Articles 14 and 16 of the titioner having resigned and joined claim for reinstatement considered in Civil Services Rules. Reliance in this dered by this court in Amandeep . present writ petition is allowed and (Annexure P-19) is hereby set aside. cted to consider the claim of the ictly in terms of Rule 7.5 of the PSEB the judgment of this Court passed in an opportunity to be heard, within a unjab efore, within s not elling ns of ion is atural tion is f the joined red in in this deep d and aside. f the PSEB sed in ithin a PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-8384- period of 03 Further, the Needless to s same shall be 14. disposed of. January 13 P.C 7 -2025 of 03 months from the date of receivin r, the decision taken thereof shall b ss to say, if the petitioner is found e hall be granted forthwith by the respon Pending miscellaneous applic ed of. 13, 2026 Whether speaking/reasone Whether Reportable. : eceiving a certified copy of this order. shall be conveyed to the petitioner. und entitled to the relief sought, the respondents- Corporation. application(s), if any, also stands (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE easoned. : Yes/No Yes/No order. tioner. t, the stands RAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.19 17:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document