MAHENDRA DEVIPRASAD DAVE Vs. DIRECTOR SOCIAL DEFENCE DEPT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UPON perusal of the petition and having heard the learned advocates for the parties, I find that the main grievance of the petitioner is with respect to his seniority vis-a-vis other employees in the cadre. His grievance started in the 1976 when the respondents passed order on 18. 2. 76. In ground 'g', he has stated that in the order dated 18. 2. 76 seniority was not protected and he had, therefore, raised the issued with the Government vide his letter dated 17. 8. 76. In ground 'h', he has further stated that on account of not fixing seniority over his juniors, the petitioner lost seniority as well as pay compared to his juniors.

(2.) OBVIOUSLY, grievance of seniority which had arisen in the year 1976 was too stale to be agitated in the year 1994. By now it is well settled that seniority in a cadre should not be reopened after a reasonable period of time and settled seniority should be allowed to rest. The claim of the petitioner for higher salary is consequential to his claim for seniority. Since I find that seniority cannot be questioned after so many years, I do not find any merits in the petition. The petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged.