Controversy surrounds dismissal of retired HCS officer Reagan Kumar

Dismissal order comes after two and a half months after compulsory retirement
Chandigarh / HNS
The dismissal of 2011 batch Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch) officer Reagan Kumar has sparked legal and administrative debate. Kumar was dismissed from government service by an order issued by the Haryana Government’s Personnel Department on April 11, 2025, later published in the official Gazette on April 22, 2025. However, due to a major oversight, the order had to be revised and republished on April 30, 2025.
The controversy arose when the name of the female government employee who accused Kumar of sexual harassment appeared fifteen times in the order published on April 22. This violated Section 16 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, and Redressal) Act, 2013. Advocate Hemant Kumar challenged this violation and wrote to the Governor, Chief Minister, Chief Secretary, State Women’s Commission, and State Human Rights Commission. Subsequently, the Personnel Department was forced to issue a revised order where the term “complainant” replaced the victim’s name.
In a further legal twist, Hemant Kumar questioned how the Haryana Government could dismiss Reagan Kumar two and a half months after his compulsory retirement on January 29, 2025.
According to him, Kumar’s employer-employee relationship with the government ended that day, making the April 11 dismissal invalid. Hemant argued that if the government wanted to dismiss Kumar, it should have first nullified the retirement order, reinstated him temporarily, and then issued a fresh dismissal order.
Under Rule 4 of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 2016, compulsory retirement and dismissal are distinct penalties. While compulsory retirement does not bar a government employee from future service, dismissal permanently disqualifies them from any future government employment.
Furthermore, Hemant highlighted inconsistencies in the dismissal order. It stated that Kumar’s dismissal would be effective from January 29, 2025, but also have a prospective effect, meaning any retirement benefits given to him after January 29 could not be revoked. This contradiction raises concerns over its legal validity.
Notably, when HCS officer Anil Nagar was dismissed in December 2021 over corruption charges, such procedural confusion did not arise because Nagar was already suspended before his dismissal. In contrast, Kumar was compulsorily retired before being dismissed, making his case legally and administratively unique.
This case may soon face judicial review, raising important questions about procedural errors and legal inconsistencies in Haryana’s governance.