'Beyond jurisdiction': Punjab and Haryana HC sets aside Chandigarh Police promotion rules for Head Constables

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has set aside a 2021 notification that amended the promotion rules for Chandigarh Police constables, holding that the Chandigarh Administration lacked the jurisdiction to make the amendment under the Police Act, 1861.

A division bench of Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Amarinder Singh Grewal passed the order on August 11, 2026, while allowing two writ petitions challenging an April 2, 2026 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Chandigarh Bench.

The CAT had upheld the June 18, 2021 notification amending Rule 13.7 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. The amendment provided that 70% of constables would be considered for promotion to Head Constable on the basis of seniority-cum-merit, 25% through the B-1 Test and the remaining 5% from outstanding sportspersons based on their date of appointment.

'1861 Act not applicable in Chandigarh'

The petitioners challenged the notification, arguing that it had been issued by exercising powers under Section 46 of the Police Act, 1861 even though the Act was no longer applicable to Chandigarh.

The high court mentioned that the Punjab Police Act, 2007 had been adopted by the Chandigarh Administration through a Ministry of Home Affairs notification dated March 29, 2010. With the adoption of the 2007 Act, the applicability of the 1861 Act stood withdrawn in Chandigarh, the court observed.

The HC held that since the 1861 Act was not applicable in Chandigarh when the 2021 notification was issued, its provisions could not have been used to amend the Punjab Police Rules, 1934. It therefore found that the power used to issue the notification was incorrect.

The court also said that the amendment should have followed the procedure prescribed under Section 80 of the Punjab Police Act, 2007. A mere notification by the Chandigarh Administration was not sufficient to amend the 1934 Rules because the procedure prescribed under the 2007 Act had not been followed.

The high court further observed that since the Ministry of Home Affairs had adopted the 2007 Act for Chandigarh, any amendment to the rules could be made by the Union government or with the approval of the Ministry. The court observed that there were no materials showing that such approval had been granted for the notification.

What happens to 42 constables who cleared B-1 test?

The judgment has, meanwhile, provided protection to the 42 candidates who had already cleared the B-1 Test.

The court said that if the Chandigarh Administration introduces a test for promotion after following the prescribed procedure, those 42 candidates will not have to take the test again. Their earlier test result will be treated as final.

If the administration instead decides to make promotions on the basis of seniority, the seniority of the candidates will have to be considered irrespective of the test result. Candidates who have already cleared the test will be considered for promotion according to their seniority.

The court also left it to the Chandigarh Administration to decide what action, if any, should be taken regarding promotions already made under the 2021 notification. It directed that affected employees must be given due notice before any reversion or change in the date of promotion.

The High Court ultimately held that the June 18, 2021 amendment was beyond the jurisdiction of the Secretary, Home Department, Chandigarh Administration and set aside the notification. It said the writ petitions were accordingly allowed.

What CAT had said

One of the key issues raised before the Tribunal was the introduction of the written test for a segment of promotions. The applicants contended that the move altered existing service conditions and affected personnel who had been awaiting promotion under the earlier system.

After examining the amended recruitment rules and the policy governing promotions, the Tribunal ruled that the administration was competent to prescribe such criteria. It observed that the allocation of a specific quota for promotion through a written examination formed part of a structured selection process.