Reversion From Higher Post After 4 Years Of Service, Without Following Procedure Is Major Penalty : Uttarakhand HC

Background Facts

The petitioner no.1 was initially appointed on the post of Lekha Parishakh (Auditor) on 27.04.1998. He was promoted to the post of Senior Auditor on 29.10.2005. Petitioners no.2 and 3 were appointed as Lekha Parishakh (Auditor) on 19.06.1995. They were promoted to the post of Senior Auditor in 2004. All the petitioners were further promoted to the post of Assistant Audit Officer on 30.06.2014. Subsequently, on 29.01.2021, they were promoted to the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Level-10).

In 2022, Dinesh Chandra Pandey filed a claim petition before the Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal seeking that his seniority be counted from the date of the promotion order and not from the date of joining. By order dated 14.08.2023, the Tribunal directed that a review DPC be held to consider his promotion from the date his juniors were promoted. If Dinesh was found fit, he should be granted promotion with all consequential benefits.

Pursuant to the Tribunal's order, on 18.03.2025, respondents were promoted to the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari. Thereafter, on 19.03.2025, the petitioners were reverted from the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Level-10) to Sahayak Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Level-8).

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the writ petition seeking quashing of the reversion orders.

It was submitted by the petitioners that the Tribunal's order dated 14.08.2023, only directed to hold a review DPC to consider the promotion of Dinesh Chandra Pandey from the date his juniors were promoted. It was further argued that the Tribunal did not issue any direction for reversion of the petitioners. Therefore, the respondents committed a grave error by reverting them from the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari after more than four years of service on the higher post. It was further submitted that the petitioners were promoted on 29.01.2021 on the recommendation of a duly constituted Departmental Promotion Committee.

On the other hand, it was submitted by the respondents that in compliance with the Tribunal's order dated 14.08.2023, a review Departmental Promotion Committee meeting was convened on 30.01.2025. It was convened to reconsider the case of Dinesh Chandra Pandey for promotion from the date his juniors were promoted. It was stated that during the review DPC, it was found that there were no available vacancies in the promotional cadre. Therefore, the earlier DPC decision dated 04.11.2020 recommending the petitioners' promotion had to be cancelled. Therefore, the petitioners were reverted from the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Level-10) to the post of Sahayak Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Level-8).

Findings of the Court

It was observed by the court that the Tribunal's order dated 14.08.2023 only directed that a review DPC be conducted for considering the promotion of Dinesh Chandra Pandey from the date his juniors were promoted and, if found fit, to grant him promotion with all consequential benefits. It was further observed that the petitioners were promoted on 29.01.2021 to the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Level-10) on the recommendation of a duly constituted Departmental Promotion Committee. Further they had been discharging their duties on the higher post for more than four years. It was held that reversion to a lower post, grade, or time scale amounts to a major penalty under Section 3(b)(ii) of the Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003. Such penalty can be imposed only after following the procedure prescribed in Rule 7 of the 2003 Rules.

It was held by the court that such reversion after rendering satisfactory service for more than four years, could not be sustained in the eyes of law. It was held that the order dated 19.03.2025 reverting the petitioners was liable to be set aside.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition was allowed, the reversion order was quashed. The respondents were directed by the court to permit the petitioners to continue discharging their duties on the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Level-10) on which they were promoted & had been discharging their duties before their reversion.

Case Name : Birendra Singh Nabiyal and others vs State of Uttarakhand and others

Case No. : Writ Petition (S/B) No.85 of 2025

Counsel for the Petitioner : Imraj Singh Rautela

Counsel for the Respondents : P.C. Bisht, learned Addl. C.S.C.