1 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2126/1995 Dr. Munshi Lal. vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2126/1995 Dr. Munshi Lal. vs. State of Rajasthan and others. Date : 3.9.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.MC Bhoot, for the petitioner. Mr.MS Singhvi, for the respondents. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner was appointed in the Government College as Lecturer in the year 1956 and he joined the duties on 14.7.1956. The petitioner retired from service on 31.1.1985. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition in this Court on 3.7.1995 i.e. more than 11 years after his retirement. The petitioner is seeking recasting of seniority and seeking appointment to the post of Reader with effect from 8.9.1964 and to the post of Professor with effect from 24.11.1973 and prayed for his appointment as Dean with effect from 15.3.1984. 2 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2126/1995 Dr. Munshi Lal. vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that grave injustice has been done to the petitioner as the petitioner was eligible to be promoted to the post of Reader as back as on 8.9.1964 and that has been denied to the petitioner on the false ground of non-availability of the post. It is submitted that because of that reason, the petitioner could not get further promotions. The petitioner submitted detail representations to the respondent University and one of the representation is dated 21.1.1983, copy of which has been placed on record as Annex.2. The petitioner thereafter pursued the matter with the respondent. Even to examine the affairs of the University, the affairs of the University came for consideration of Justice Singh Commission. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner's seniority was ignored, his outstanding academic record has been ignored, his work as a teacher was ignored. The petitioner was further subjected to discrimination and instead of sending him abroad, number of juniors to him were sent abroad and subsequently selected and appointed on higher post i.e. on the post of Lecturer, Reader, Professor and Dean. For the delay in approaching this Court, the contention of the petitioner is that the 3 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2126/1995 Dr. Munshi Lal. vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. petitioner continuously represented his case before the respondents and when he failed to get any relief from the respondents, he preferred this writ petition. The respondents have submitted reply to the writ petition and raised preliminary objections obviously on the ground of delay, laches and also submitted that the claim is stale claim and the settled position which is since 1964 cannot be disturbed in a petition filed by the petitioner after 31 years. It is also submitted that the petitioner did not mention in the writ petition that his complaint was considered by the Singh Commission and his claim was rejected by the Singh Commission and copy of report of Singh Commission has been placed on record as Annex.R-2/1. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the facts of the case. The facts referred above clearly reveal that the petitioner's first claim, which may be foundation for other reliefs, relates back to the year 1964, the day on which, according to the petitioner, his junior was appointed/promoted on the post of Reader i.e. with effect from 8.9.1964. 4 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2126/1995 Dr. Munshi Lal. vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. Be it as it may be, the provisional seniority list came to the knowledge of the petitioner in the year 1983 for which he submitted representation, then further promotions were given to the other persons as per the petitioner himself as mentioned in the writ petition. The petitioner did not choose to challenge any of the orders by which the other persons have been given benefit by the respondents denying petitioner such benefits. In view of the above reasons, the writ petition of the petitioner being delayed by 31 years originally, then by 22 years and ultimately by about 10 years, deserves to be dismissed only on the ground of delay and the petitioner's claim is stale claim and settled position cannot be disturbed after the delay of decades. Consequently, this writ petition is hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya