1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICTURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT ] JODHPUR. O R D E R Narain Lal Sharma. Versus State of Rajasthan & ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2504/2007 ... Date of Order: May 02, 2007 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Mr. S.P. Sharma, for the petitioner. BY THE COURT: By the instant writ petition, a challenge has been made to the orders Annx.9 dated 18-4-2006 and Annx.11 dated 4-7-2006 passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Bench at Jodhpur (for short, “the Appellate Tribunal” hereinafter) and the petitioner has sought a direction to the respondents to accord him promotion and re-fix his pay in the pay scale with effect from the date when his juniors viz. Shiv Kishan Acharya, Chand Mal Jain and Nand Lal were given the benefit. 2 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. From the averments made in the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner has been litigating one way or the other since 1977 before this Court and the Appellate Tribunal. Various orders have been passed by this Court as also by the Appellate Tribunal as is evident from the averments made in the writ petition. The petitioner claims himself to be senior to Shiv Kishan Acharya, Chand Mal Jain and Nand Lal, but he has neither impleaded these persons before this Court in the writ petition, nor before the Appellate Tribunal in the various appeals filed by the petitioner. Petitioner filed an appeal No.449/1999, which came to be decided on 18-4-2006 by the Appellate Tribunal. It also appears from the order of the Appellate Tribunal dated 18- 4-2006 (Ann.9) that the appellant has been superannuated on 31-1-1983 and for the same cause, he is claiming an identical relief for which earlier he filed SBCWP No. 326/1987 claiming himself to be senior to Shiv Kishan Acharya and also claiming his promotion and salary in the pay scale of Rs.225-525 and that writ petition came to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. The petitioner claims promotion claiming himself to be senior to aforesaid three persons, viz. Shiv Kishan Acharya, Chand Mal Jain and Nand Lal without there being any foundation in the writ petition at such an inordinate and unexplained delay. In para 6 of the writ petition, it has been averred 3 that incidently the petitioner came to be appointed as the Co- Examiner to conduct S.T.C. Examination at the Basic S.T.C. Training School, Bikaner and at that time he had an opportunity to look into the Service Record of Shiv Kishan Acharya who was junior to him but he was given the grade of Class-I Teacher i.e. Rs.225-525/- right from 1-9-1968. Such relief after a delay of about 37 years without impleading the persons from whom the petitioner claims himself to the senior, cannot be granted. It also appears that the petitioner succeeded in the appeal filed by him before the Appellate Tribunal and even in the contempt petition seeking compliance of the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal and the relief granted by the Appellate Tribunal has been made available to him in the contempt proceedings, but now the petitioner says that a complete justice has not been done in his favour. Such an averment is unfounded to the extent that if the reliefs prayed for has not been granted and if for the reasons best known to the petitioner, the relief has not been prayed earlier, the same cannot be agitated after such an inordinate delay. Even from the averments made in the writ petition, it appears that on an earlier occasion, when the petitioner claimed the pay scale of Rs.225-525/- in the Pay Scale No.15 at par with 4 Shiv Kishan Acharya, the respondents came with the case that Shiv Kishan Acharya has been wrongly promoted and given the higher pay pay scale of Rs. 225-525/-and the same has been withdrawn by the respondents. If that is so, then if any pay scale higher than the petitioner had been granted to the persons allegedly junior to the petitioner, the same has been withdrawn as per the averments of the respondents made in their reply. In para 9 of the writ petition, it has been averred that the respondents came out with the stand that the illegal pay scale of Rs.225-525/- granted to Shiv Kishan Achaya has been withdrawn and recovery has been ordered. At any rate, the writ petition filed by the petitioner suffers from delay and laches, as also non-joinder of necessary party, over whom the petitioner claims himself to be senior. In para 15 of the writ petition, the petitioner claims promotion on the post of Senior Teacher on the ground that though has has not been promoted as such upto the age of his superannuation but he had been discharging the work of the Senior Teacher and, therefore, claims equal pay for equal work. Admittedly, the petitioner superannuated on 31-1-1983 and if prior to his superannuation he has work as the Senior Teacher then the relief of equal pay for equal work claimed by him after a period of 23 years from the date of his superannuation, cannot 5 be granted as the relief claimed by him is hopelessly suffers from delay and laches. For the reasons aforesaid, in my view, the writ petition has no merit and it is, therefore, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs