IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 28TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 4249 of 2011(E) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. Y.PRASAD, S/O.YESUDASAN, AGED 34 YEARS, EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, IRINJALAKUDA, RESIDING AT BETHAL, ARAVILA, KAVANAD P.O., KOLLAM, PIN 691 003. 2. P.R.LALU, S/O.RAGHAVAN, AGED 35 YEARS, EXCISE INSPECTOR, NORMANDY BREWERIES AND DISTILLERY, CHEEMENI, KASARAGOD, RESIDING AT PAZHAYARIKKADU HOUSE, 3/201, EASLAND ENCLAVE, ELAMKULAM, KOCHI-20. 3. A.T.JOBY, S/O.A.K.THOMMANKUTTY, AGED 39 YEARS, EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM RESIDING AT ACHANDY HOUSE, VELLAMACHIRA P.O., THAZHEKKADU (VIA), THRISSUR, PIN 680 697. BY ADV. SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, TRIVANDRUM.PIN- 698 001 2. G.PRADEEP, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA.PIN- 688 582 3. N.Y.KRISHNANKUTTY CHETTIYAR, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY.PIN- 690 518 R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.N.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Civil) No.4249 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of February, 2011 Judgment In this writ petition, the petitioners are challenging Ext.P1 final seniority list seeking the following reliefs: “1. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to strictly adhere to the provisions contained in the Special Rules as well as in the KS & SSR and reassign seniority in the cadre of Excise Inspectors and assign date of promotion to the promotees from the date they became eligible for promotion to the cadre of Excise Inspector only and also include persons in the seniority list strictly adhering to the quota earmarked for promotion. 2. To quash Exhibit P1 final seniority list to the extent it is challenged in this writ petition.” Ext.P1 final seniority list was published as early as on 22.6.2007. The petitioners have filed this writ petition only on 8.2.2011. The petitioners' explanation for the long delay is contained in paragraph 9 which reads as follows: “It is humbly submitted that 2 other writ petitions challenging the very same seniority list are pending consideration of this Hon'ble Court as W.P.No.25827/2007 & W.P.No.21422/2008. It is submitted that the petitioners have filed IA 15195/2010 in WP No.25827/2007 earlier and this Hon'ble Court opined that if they have any grievance the proper course is to file a separate Writ Petition. Accordingly this Writ Petition is being filed. Respondents 2 and 3 who are impleaded in a representative capacity in W.P.No.25827/2007 are made parties here also in a representative capacity.” The fact that somebody else has filed writ petitions challenging WPC 4249/11 2 the very same seniority list cannot be taken as sufficient explanation for the delay of the petitioners in challenging the seniority list. It is to be noted that the petitioners in those writ petitions approached this court within a reasonable time while the petitioners were sleeping. The fact that the petitioners have filed an I.A. for impleading in W.P.C.No.25827/2007 in 2010 is also no sufficient explanation for the delay. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the writ petition suffers from the vice of unexplained delay and laches. The writ petition is dismissed on that ground. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE. srd WPC 4249/11 3