Yes, it is plausible for a nuclear reactor to fulfill both roles.
When the reactor is designed to be used on a space ship, it should be designed to be operational under different acceleration conditions. It should work both in zero-g and when the ship is accelerating.
Enceladus has a surface gravity of 0.113 m/s². When the reactor can operate while the ship accelerates with more acceleration than that (which would be required in order to land safely on Enceladus), it can operate on the surface of Enceladus. The reactor might be designed to only deal with acceleration in the direction of the main engines and not for handling lateral acceleration. The best way to land on a planet without an atmosphere is with the main engines facing down, so the reactor would end up in the correct orientation. But when your ship does not land that way for some reason (like accidentally landing on sloped terrain and tipping over), the reactor might need to be rotated before it can be used. That might be quite a lot of work (even in low gravity).
But if you want the mission to use two different reactors during different mission phases for some dramaturgic reason, there are some possible justifications:
- One reactor is optimized for burst power generation during acceleration phases, while the other is optimized for continuous low-power operation as required by a permanent colony.
- One reactor actually must be operated when under acceleration (for example because it uses acceleration to compress the fissile material enough to reach criticality) while the second is rated to be operated only below 0.12 m/s² acceleration, or some delicate parts break (transportation locks prevent them from breaking during the journey).