Punjab and Haryana High Court Stays Suspension of UHBVN Officer, Calls Out Arbitrary Disciplinary Actions

Court rules disciplinary proceedings must adhere strictly to prescribed service rules under Article 309, criticizes influence of non-statutory bodies.

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed the suspension of Rahul Yadav, a Sub Divisional Officer with the Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (UHBVN), Guhla, while emphasizing the importance of adhering to prescribed service rules under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The judgment was delivered by Justice Harpreet Singh Brar on October 28, 2025, in the case of Rahul Yadav v. State of Haryana and others.

The case arose when Balwinder Singh, father of Abhinav, whose request for a permanent electricity connection was repeatedly denied due to construction issues, lodged a complaint with the District Grievance Committee (DGC), Kaithal. The DGC, led by the Energy Minister of Haryana, directed Yadav's suspension and the filing of an FIR against him, alleging bribery. However, the court noted that the DGC, a non-statutory body, lacks the authority to initiate such disciplinary actions.

The court underscored that any disciplinary proceedings against state employees, such as Yadav, must be initiated by the competent authority-in this case, the Managing Director of UHBVN-following established service rules. Justice Brar criticized the arbitrary nature of the suspension, which appeared influenced by the Energy Minister's designation, and stressed that such actions undermine the rule of law and the constitutional protections afforded to state employees under Article 309.

The judgment further highlighted that disciplinary actions must be carried out with due application of mind and follow the sacrosanct procedures outlined in service rules. The court's decision to stay the impugned communication and any subsequent actions until further orders is a reminder of the judiciary's role in upholding procedural fairness and preventing arbitrary exercise of power.

The matter has been adjourned to April 21, 2026, with the court directing that no coercive actions be taken against Yadav based on the DGC's directions until the next hearing.

Bottom Line:

Disciplinary proceedings against State employees must strictly adhere to prescribed service rules under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and cannot be arbitrarily influenced by non-statutory bodies or individuals.

Statutory provision(s): Article 309 of the Constitution of India

Rahul Yadav v. State of Haryana, (Punjab and Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2800053