High CourtsDivision Bench(2026) 08 P&H CK 4836

Nishi Rani & Ors. vs State Of Haryana & Anr.

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 18 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J · Amarinder Singh Grewal, J
CASE NUMBER
CWP-8227-2022 (O&M), CWP-10235-2020 (O&M), COCP-287-2022 (O&M)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 703 words

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral)

1.

Present are the bunch of three petitions, the details of which are mentioned in the heading, involving common question of law in the context of common set of facts and thus they are being decided by a common order.

2.

The present bunch of petitions have been filed challenging the order of reversion dated 11.03.2022 wherein the petitioners were reverted from the post of High School Headmasters to that of Elementary School Headmasters.

3.

It may be noticed that while issuing notice of motion on 22.04.2022, the operation of such reversion order was stayed and, out of the total 32 petitioners in all the writ petitions, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits that 30 petitioners have already been retired while working as High School Headmasters keeping in view the interim order passed by this Court and are being paid their retiral benefits in accordance with the said fact so as to treat them having retired as High School Headmaster.

4.

Learned counsel for respondent-State submits that the petitioners have already retired while working on the post of High School Headmasters and they are getting the pensionary benefits on such post and only two petitioners are in service even as of now and as per the interim order they are also continuing on the post of High School Headmaster.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) submits that, as most of the petitioners have already retired, it will be impermissible to implement the orders of reversion dated 11.03.2022 (Annexure P-12), especially when it has already come on record that during the pendency of the writ petitions, even otherwise, their juniors have already been promoted as High School Headmasters in the year 2021 itself hence, the reversions, which were ordered in March, 2022, were otherwise bad.

6.

Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits that qua the two Headmasters working, the only question that arises is qua their date of promotion as High School Headmaster, even if the respondent-State is given liberty to decide the said issue.

7.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present case with their able assistance.

8.

Keeping in view certain facts which have come into operation after the filing of the petitions as well as before filing of the petition, the juniors of the petitioners had already been promoted as High School Headmasters even prior to the date of reversion i.e. in the year 2021, the reversion order could not have been ordered in the year 2022 and only question would have been with regard to the change of date of promotion to the post of High School Headmaster.

9.

Even otherwise, 30 petitioners have already retired from the post of High School Headmaster and they have already been given their pensionary benefits by treating them as High School Headmaster, which were calculated keeping in view their initial date of promotion hence, disturbing the same will amount to hardship to a retired employee. Hence, the respondent-State is directed not to give effect to such orders of reversion qua the petitioners who have already retired while working as High School Headmasters during the pendency of the writ petitions.

10.

With regard to the two petitioners, though once it is conceded that their juniors have been promoted as High School Headmasters in the year 2021, the question of reverting them does not arise. Hence, the respondent-State will be given liberty to re-consider their claim as to whether, in such situation, their reversion was bad or not and whether they were also to be allowed to retain the same benefit as being allowed to be retained by the Headmasters who have retired, so as to avoid any hardship as a one-time measure.

11.

Present writ petitions are disposed of with the above observations. However, question qua vires remains left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case.

12.

As the main petitions are disposed of, no order is required to be passed in the Contempt Petition and the same is also disposed of accordingly.

13.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

14.

Photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases.