High Court Clarifies Probation Reversion Rules
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a significant clarification regarding employee probation periods. The court stated that when an employer reverts an employee during probation due to unsatisfactory work and conduct, this action cannot be considered stigmatic or discriminatory. This holds true particularly when the reversion aligns with applicable service rules and the terms of appointment.
Probation Serves Critical Function
The court emphasized that probation serves a vital strategic function in public employment. This practice provides employers with what legal experts call locus poenitentiae – essentially an opportunity to reconsider their decision about a recruit's suitability. During probation, employers can assess whether an employee possesses the necessary competence and overall fitness for a permanent role.
For employees, successfully completing probation leads to permanent positions with associated benefits and protections. Therefore, the court stressed that probation represents a determinative stage in employment. It should never be treated as a mere empty formality.
Same Principle Applies to Promotions
The High Court further explained that this rationale extends to promotion cases as well. When an employee receives a promotion, their duties and responsibilities often change substantially. Consequently, employers retain the prerogative to determine whether the promoted individual is well-suited for the new role. This assessment period following promotion serves a legitimate purpose.
Case Background: Major Shaveta Sharma
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar delivered these observations while hearing a petition filed by Major Shaveta Sharma. She is a former Indian Army officer currently serving as an engineer with Haryana Sahari Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP). Major Sharma sought to quash a December 2025 order that reverted her from the position of Superintending Engineer (SE) back to Executive Engineer (XEN).
She also requested the court to nullify the probation conditions attached to her promotion letter from July 2024, which elevated her from XEN to SE. Major Sharma argued that an employee should only face probation once during their entire service tenure.
Career History and Legal Challenges
Major Sharma joined the Indian Army in 2001, serving as a Major before transitioning to HSVP as a Sub-Divisional Engineer in 2006. She received promotion to Executive Engineer in 2015. Her career faced turbulence when an FIR alleging corruption-related offenses was registered against her in 2020.
Following an internal inquiry, the chargesheet was dropped in July 2024. Subsequently, her name was recommended for promotion. She was promoted to Superintending Engineer on a probationary basis that same month.
Second FIR and Reversion
In September 2025, the Anti-Corruption Bureau registered a second FIR concerning alleged irregularities in road construction projects. Based on pending vigilance inquiries, HSVP reverted Major Sharma to her previous post in December 2025. The authority cited unsatisfactory work and conduct during her probation period as the reason for this decision.
Court's Mixed Verdict
After hearing all parties involved, the High Court delivered a nuanced judgment. The court quashed the specific demotion orders against Major Sharma. It observed that authorities provided no opportunity for a personal hearing before passing the reversion order.
The court noted that reversion constitutes a serious civil consequence impacting an employee's career trajectory. Such actions carry significant financial and societal implications. Therefore, they must adhere to principles of natural justice to ensure fairness.
Upholding Probation in Promotions
However, the High Court simultaneously upheld HSVP's right to place officers on probation following promotion. The court found that HSVP was legally entitled to impose probation upon promotion. This entitlement stems from service rules that explicitly provide for a one-year probation period in promotion cases.
The judgment thus balances employee rights with employer prerogatives, setting important precedents for public sector employment practices.
