Uttarakhand High Court
Birendra Singh Nabiyal And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 30 July, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. G. NARENDAR
AND
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MR. ALOK MAHRA
Writ Petition (S/B) No.85 of 2025
Birendra Singh Nabiyal and others --Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents
Judgment reserved on 15.07.2025
Judgment delivered on 30.07.2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Imraj Singh Rautela, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. P.C. Bisht, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State.
JUDGMENT :
(per Mr. Alok Mahra, J.)
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and
learned Addl. C.S.C. for the State.
2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as
follows:
According to the petitioners, petitioner no.1 was
initially appointed on the post of Lekha Parishakh
(Auditor) on 27.04.1998 and later promoted to the post
of Senior Auditor, on 29.10.2005; that, petitioner nos. 2
& 3 were initially appointed on the post of Lekha
Parishakh (Auditor) on 19.06.1995 and later promoted to
the post of Senior Auditor in the year 2004; and again,
petitioners were promoted to the post of Assistant Audit
Officer on 30.06.2014 and joined their services as
Assistant Audit Officer on 30.06.2014; that, subsequently
on 29.01.2021, the petitioners were promoted on the
post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari on
the Grade Pay ₹5400/-, Level-10; that, in year 2022, one
Dinesh Chandra Pandey filed a Claim Petition
No.13/NB/DB.2022 before the Uttarakhand Public
Services Tribunal claiming that the seniority should be
counted from the date of posting of the order of
promotion and not from the date of joining; that learned
Tribunal vide order dated 14.08.2023 disposed of the
Claim Petition and directed that a review DPC be
conducted for considering the promotion of the petitioner
(Dinesh Chandra Pandey) to the post of Audit Officer
from the date his juniors have been promoted and, if he
is found fit, he be promoted from the date on which his
juniors have been promoted with salary and all other
consequential benefits; that, on 18.03.2025, an order
was passed by Secretary, Finance, Government of
Uttarakhand, whereby respondent nos.4 & 5 were
promoted to the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha
Parikshak Adhikari; that, thereafter, on 19.03.2025, an
order came to be passed by Director, Lekha Pariksha
(Audit), Uttarakhand (respondent no.3), whereby
petitioners were informed that they have been reverted
from the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak
Adhikari on a Grade Pay ₹5400/--Level-10 to Sahayak
Lekha Parikshak Adhikari on a Grade Pay ₹4800/-Level-8.
Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioners have approached this
Court, seeking the following reliefs:-
"i. Issue a writ, order or directions in the
nature of certiorari quashing the order dated
19.03.2025 passed by respondent no.3 which
is annexed as Annexure no.1.
ii. Issue a writ, order or directions in the
nature of certiorari quashing the order dated
18.03.2025 passed by respondent no.1 which
is annexed as Annexure no.7.
iii. Issue a writ, order or directions in the
nature of mandamus directing the respondent
authority to reinstate the petitioners back to
the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha
Parikshak Adhikari on a Grade pay 5400/-
Level-10 along with all other consequential
benefits."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
there was no direction to revert the petitioners and the
only direction issued by learned Tribunal was that a
review DPC be conducted for considering the promotion
of Shri Dinesh Chandra Pandey to the post of Audit
Officer from the date his juniors have been promoted
and, if he is found fit, he will also be granted promotion
from the date on which his juniors was granted
promotion; that, the present petitioners were granted
promotion on the recommendation of the duly constituted
Departmental Promotion Committee by the concerned
department and the impugned order has been passed in
violation of principles of natural justice, as no show cause
notice was issued to the petitioners and no opportunity of
being heard was afforded to the petitioners, before
passing the reversion order.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State
submits that, pursuant to order dated 14.08.2023 passed
by learned Tribunal, the review DPC was held on
30.01.2025, but due to non-availability of the vacancies,
the decision taken in the earlier DPC dated 04.11.2020,
by which petitioners were recommended for promotion to
the post of Assistant Director/Audit Officer, has been
cancelled and, therefore, the petitioners were reverted
from the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak
Adhikari (Grade Pay ₹5400/- Level-10) to the post of
Sahayak Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Grade Pay ₹4800/-
Level-8).
5. From the bare perusal of the order passed by
learned Uttarakhand Public Services Tribunal, Bench at
Nainital, it is revealed that the Tribunal directed that a
review DPC be conducted for considering the promotion
of petitioner (Dinesh Chandra Pandey) to the post of
Audit Officer from the date his juniors have been
promoted and, if he is found fit, he be promoted from the
date on which his juniors have been promoted with salary
and all other consequential benefits.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances
of the case, we are of the considered opinion that since
the petitioners were granted promotion on 29.01.2021 to
the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari
(Grade Pay ₹5400/-, Level-10) on the recommendation
made by duly constituted Departmental Promotion
Committee and, after rendering satisfactory service for a
period of more than four years on the promotional post,
they ought not to have been reverted back to the post of
Sahayak Lekha Parikshak Adhikari (Grade Pay ₹4800/-
Level-8).
7. Even otherwise, reduction to a lower post,
grade, or time scale is a major penalty, as enumerated
under Section 3 (b) (ii) of the Uttarakhand Government
Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2003, the
procedure for imposing major penalties can be imposed
only after following procedure prescribed under Rule 7 of
the Rules, 2003. It is settled proposition of law, reversion
to a lower post, grade, or time scale entails civil
consequences, and it could not be inflected without
following the procedure, as prescribed under the law.
Admittedly, in the present case, the petitioners have been
reverted without following the procedure as prescribed
under the law.
8. In such view of the matter, the impugned order
dated 19.03.2025 cannot be sustained in the eyes of law
and is liable to be set aside and is hereby set aside. The
writ petition stands allowed. The respondents are
directed to permit the petitioners to discharge duties on
the post of Sahayak Nideshak/Lekha Parikshak Adhikari
(Grade Pay ₹5400/-, Level-10) on which they were
promoted & had been discharging their duties before
their reversion.
9. There shall be no order as to costs.
(G. NARENDAR, C. J.)
(ALOK MAHRA, J.)
Dated:30.07.2025
BS
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=fbbd191c8bdb8b16e8ca7937deaf72a17c02fe
BALWANT SINGH 2eacbf28cdf4ba7ce8640c5820, postalCode=263001,
st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=04E141DF4614F9A4D5F48346EB553DE
5185F418755DC00A7A13C14A680C3FA90,
cn=BALWANT SINGH
Date: 2025.07.30 11:39:50 +05'30'
