AYURVEDA, HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. JAGDISH RAJ PRABHAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment, dated 8.4.2009, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP(T) No. 2884 of 2008. The grievance of the petitioner, who firstly approached the Administrative Tribunal, is that the services rendered by him as Demonstrator/Lecturer in Government Ayurvedic College, Paprola, District Kangra, H.P., till his regularization on 26.2.1986 be taken into consideration for the purposes of determining the seniority and for considering him for the post of Assistant Professor/Senior Lecturer. As pointed out above, the petitioner originally filed an O.A.(D) No. 464 of 1995 stating that he had worked as Demonstrator/Lecturer and that he be given appropriate place in the seniority of Demonstrators/Lecturers. The petitioner had made a representation in this behalf, but the same was rejected by the Government, hence he filed the Original Application.

(2.) NOTICE in the Original Application was issued on 20th April, 1995. On 27.12.2007 i.e. 12 years after the admission of the Application, when the same came up for hearing before the erstwhile Tribunal, the learned Additional Advocate General sought one last opportunity to file reply and on his request, six weeks time was granted. Reply was not filed when the mater was listed on 17.6.2008, but again a request was made by the State that more time to file reply be allowed and last opportunity of four weeks was granted.

(3.) SHRI Rajesh Mandhotra, learned Deputy Advocate General, urges that one opportunity should have been granted to the State to file reply. We are unable to accept this contention because from the facts narrated above, it is apparent that for 14 long years, the State did not care to file reply and now it must suffer the consequences.