CWP-12770 IN TH 248(4 cases) (1) Gaurav Goya Punjab State (2) Binnu Goyal Punjab State (3) Avinash Cha Punjab State 1 770-2025 and connected cases N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGA cases) Date Goyal VERSUS State Power Corporation Limited and Goyal VERSUS State Power Corporation Limited and CWP h Chawla VERSUS State Power Corporation Limited and NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH Date of Decision: January 22, 2026 CWP-12770-2025 (O&M) .....Petitioner SUS ed and others ..Responden CWP-20213-2025 .....Petitioner SUS ed and others ..Responden CWP-20232-2025 .....Petitioner SUS ed and others ..Responden , 2026 itioner ondents itioner ondents itioner ondents PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.23 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12770 (4) Jeevan Kuma Punjab State CORAM: Present : HARPREET 1. writ petitions sake of brevit 2. 226/227 of th of certiorari P-11) and 03 voluntary rev Upper Divisi directions to him voluntary 2 770-2025 and connected cases CWP Kumar VERSUS State Power Corporation Limited and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA Mr. Gopal Singh Nahel, Advo cases. Mr. Pradeep Sharma and Ms. M respondent(s)-PSPCL in all case REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) This common order shall dispo titions as they arise from a similar fa brevity, the facts are taken from CWP The present civil writ petition of the Constitution of India for the rari for quashing the impugned ord and 03.05.2024 (Annexure P-5) where ary reversion from the post of Superin Division Clerk (AC) was rejected. A ons to the respondents to reconsider th luntary reversion/demotion. CWP-33016-2025 .....Petitioner SUS ed and others ..Responden HARPREET SINGH BRAR Advocates for the petitioners in all s. Mehak Kanwar, Advocate for the ll cases. l dispose of the aforementioned civil ilar factual matrix. However, for the CWP-12770-2025 etition has been filed under Article or the issuance of a writ in the nature ed order dated 22.04.2025 (Annexure whereby the request of petitioner for uperintendent Divisional Accounts to ed. A Further prayer is made seeking ider the claim of petitioner and grant itioner ondents in all or the civil or the rticle nature exure er for to eking grant PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.23 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12770 3. petitioner joi Clerk (UDC) without any c to the post o probation per Service Class (Annexure P suffering fro which he has been under c Amar Hospi submitted tha condition of the ICU. The medical cond 2024. Howev ground that lower post an 03.05.2024 ( that a large reversion and Learned coun 3 770-2025 and connected cases Learned counsel for the petition oined the service of respondents UDC) Accounts on 19.09.2016 and he t any complaint of any kind. Thereaft post of Superintendent Divisional Acc ion period of one year in terms of Re e Class-III Regulation, 1991, vide pro ure P-1). Learned counsel further ng from a chronic ailment, namely A he has undergone surgery for replacem nder continuous medical treatment a Hospital, Patiala, as is evident from ted that during the pendency of the pr on of the petitioner deteriorated furth The petitioner had sought reversion l condition by submitting a representa However, the said request was declin at there were no instructions or p post and the file was consigned to rec 024 (Annexure P-5). In the meantim large number of similarly situated on and some of such requests were d counsel places reliance upon the jud tioner, inter alia, contends that the dents-Corporation as Upper Division he has been performing his duties ereafter, the petitioner was promoted al Accounts subject to completion of of Regulation 11 of PSEB Accounts de promotion order dated 04.10.2023 rther submits that the petitioner is mely Aortic Stenosis, on account of placement of his aortic valve. He has ent at Rajindra Hospital as well as t from Annexure P-3. It is further the present writ petition, the medical further and he was even admitted to ersion to his lower post in view of his esentation (Annexure P-4) in January, declined by the respondents on the s or policy regarding reversion to a to record vide impugned order dated eantime, the petitioner came to know ituated employees had also sought were accepted by the respondents. the judgment passed by a Coordinate the vision duties moted ion of ounts .2023 ner is unt of has ell as urther edical tted to of his nuary, n the n to a dated know ought dents. dinate PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.23 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12770 Bench of this State Power (Annexure P regarding abs were issued t reversion. Re passed in CW Corporation both the af respondents. deserves reco 4. total of 38 Divisional A employees h period from J promotion. It requests has the responde permitted eith it would cr respondent- administrativ 4 770-2025 and connected cases of this Court in CWP No. 23153 of 2 ower Corporation Limited and o ure P-18), wherein a similar objecti ing absence of any policy for reversio sued to consider the claim of the petit on. Reliance is also placed upon th CWP No. 25341 of 2024, Chetan n Limited and others (Annexure the aforesaid cases, voluntary rev dents. In view of the medical condit consideration in the light of the af Per contra, learned counsel for f 38 employees were promoted to nal Accounts from October, 2023 ees had decided to forgo the said pr from January, 2024 to March, 2025, 2 tion. It is contended that acceptance o ts has the potential to adversely affect pondent-Corporation. It is further su ted either to forgo promotions or seek ld create serious hurdles in the -Corporation, adversely affec strative efficiency. The plea of discrim of 2023, Jagtar Singh vs. Punjab d others, decided on 13.12.2023 objection raised by the respondents eversion, was rejected and directions e petitioner therein seeking voluntary pon the judgment dated 04.10.2024 tan Kumar vs. Punjab State Power nexure P-20). It is submitted that in y reversion was allowed by the condition of the petitioner, his case the aforesaid judgments. sel for the respondents submits that a ted to the post of Superintendent 2023 onwards, out of whom 17 said promotion. Likewise, during the 025, 27 employees have forgone their tance of a large number of reversion affect the administrative structure of her submitted that if employees are r seek reversions at their convenience, the effective functioning of the affecting public interest and discrimination raised by the petitioner njab .2023 dents, ctions untary .2024 wer hat in y the s case that a ndent m 17 g the e their ersion ure of es are ience, f the and tioner PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.23 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12770 is stated to be the responde 25.05.2025, i be allowed un 5. through the r of any exis respondent- entertain any reflected in operational e Corporation, Accounts is a 6. likely to cau circumstance benefit of th (supra), as th the aforesaid discriminatio 7. in State of O 5 770-2025 and connected cases d to be misconceived. A conscious po spondent-Corporation in this regard 025, it has been decided that no reque wed until a comprehensive policy is fo I have heard learned counsel h the record with their able assistance. existing policy or instructions gove -Corporation has taken a consciou in any such requests until a policy ed in the instructions dated 25.05.2 onal efficiency and ensuring smooth ation, particularly when the post nts is a sensitive revenue-related post. Permitting voluntary reversions to cause administrative and operation stances of the present case, the pet of the judgments rendered in Jagt , as those cases were decided on thei resaid instructions. As such, this Cou ination raised by learned counsel for t Moreover, A two Judge bench of Orissa vs. Mamata Mohanty (20 ous policy decision has been taken by regard and vide instructions dated o request for voluntary reversion shall y is formulated. unsel for the parties and have gone stance. It emerges that, in the absence s governing voluntary reversion, the nscious administrative decision not to olicy is framed. The said decision, 5.05.2025, is aimed at maintaining ooth functioning of the respondent post of Superintendent Divisional post. rsions in the absence of a policy is erational disruption. In the facts and he petitioner cannot claim parity or Jagtar Singh and Chetan Kumar n their own facts prior to issuance of is Court finds no merit in the plea of el for the petitioner. bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (2011)3 SCC 436 has clarified that en by dated shall gone sence n, the not to ision, aining ndent- sional licy is ts and ity or mar nce of lea of Court d that PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.23 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12770 Article 14 of Speaking thro 8. restraining ac this Court fin writ petition view the m respondent- Patiala symp shall be take 6 770-2025 and connected cases 14 of the Constitution of India does n ng through Dr. Justice B.S. Chauhan, t "It is a settled legal pro meant to perpetuate illeg negative equality. Thus, situated persons have inadvertently or by mista any legal right on the relief. [Vide State (UT Singh; Yogesh Kumar v. Buttons Ltd. v. State of H M.P.; Krishan Bhatt v. St Upendra Narayan Singh Chandra Mondal.]" 10. Similary the Hon'ble Supre M. K. Sarkar, (2010)2 SCC 59 is a positive concept and cann manner. Irregularity and illega the ground that illegal bene others". Thus, if some similar granted some benefit by mist confer any legal right on the pe Until a policy is framed, th ing acceptance of reversion requests urt finds no ground to interfere in th tition(s) are dismissed being devoid the medical condition of the petit -Corporation is directed to consi sympathetically, in accordance with e taken within a period of four week does not perpetuate negative equality. uhan, the following was held: proposition that Article 14 is not illegality and it does not envisage hus, even if some other similarly ave been granted some benefit istake, such order does not confer the petitioner to get the same UT of Chandigarh) v. Jagjit r v. State (NCT of Delhi); Anand of Haryana; K.K.Bhatia v. State of State of J & K; State of Bihar v. Singh; Union of India v. Kartick upreme Court in Union of India v. 59 has laid down that "Article 14 cannot be enforced in a negative illegality cannot be perpetuated on benefits have been extended to ilarly situated persons have been mistake, such an order does not e petitioner to stake claim. …” (emphasis added) ed, the administrative instructions uests cannot be faulted. Accordingly, e in the impugned order and all three evoid of merit. However, keeping in petitioner-Sh. Gourav Goyal, the consider his request for transfer to with law. A decision in this regard weeks from the date of receipt of a uality. not sage larly nefit nfer ame agjit and te of r v. rtick ia v. e 14 ative d on to been ot ded) ctions ingly, three ing in l, the er to regard t of a PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.23 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-12770 copy of this pay. Lastly, i allowing any affected emp respondent- 9. disposed of. 10. cases. January 22 P.C 7 770-2025 and connected cases f this order, as the petitioner is prese astly, if any, deviation is made from g any requests for voluntary reversi d employee shall be at liberty to initiat -Corporation under Article 215 of Pending miscellaneous applicat ed of. Photocopy of this order be pl 22, 2026 Whether speaking/reasone Whether Reportable. : s presently on medical leave without instructions dated 25.05.2025 by eversion, the petitioner or any other initiate contempt proceedings against 15 of the Constitution of India. plication(s), if any, shall also stands be placed on the file of connected (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE easoned. : Yes/No Yes/No ithout 25 by other gainst stands ected RAR) PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.01.23 16:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document