DARYAO SINGH Vs. HARYANA STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is admitted position that the petitioner after having been appointed as a Steno-typist on 2.6.1975 on temporary basis, was given regular appointment as Clerk w.e.f. 1.1.1980. He was thereafter promoted as Accountant on 29.4.1993. In the seniority list of Accountants as it stood on 1.1.1996, his date of appointment as Clerk has been shown to be 1.1.1980 and his seniority has been fixed at Sr. No. 126. The aforementioned seniority list was revised on 31.3.2001 and the seniority number of the petitioner was changed to Sr. No. 75. The names of the private respondents have been shown at Sr. Nos. 38 (Rama Rani), 48 (Charanjit Singh), 50 (Ram Karn) and 36 (Waryam Singh). Accordingly, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 being senior to the petitioner, have been further promoted to the post of Block Development and Panchayat Officer. At this stage, firstly the petitioner approached this Court by filing C.W.P. No. 15091 of 2003, which was disposed of by this Court on 22.9.2003 by directing the official respondents to decide the representation made by the petitioner on 8.7.2002. The official respondents have rejected the representation made by the petitioner on 30.11.2003 (P-5) by passing a speaking order and the same reads as under:

(2.) It is, thus, evident that all along the date of appointment of the petitioner on the post of Clerk has been taken to be 1.1.1980, which was the date of his regularisation on the aforementioned post. The claim of the petitioner that he is required to be considered as Clerk w.e.f. 2.6.1975 as he was appointed in a regular manner by requisitioning his name from Employment Exchange and then by selection, is wholly belated. It is well settled that the settled things cannot be un-settled so as to cause prejudice to all those who have taken the seniority position as settled. The petitioner has been promoted on the basis of his seniority as Accountant on 29.4.1993 and he cannot reopen the issue of seniority by claiming that his appointment as Clerk should be ante-dated to 2.6.1975. In that regard we draw support from a Constitution Bench judgment of Honble the Supreme Court in the case of Rabindra Nath Bose v. Union of India . In that case also there was inordinate delay in raising a challenge to the seniority list, which was rejected being belated. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the instant petition.

(3.) Dismissed.