1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- CIVIL WRIT No. 3361 of 2008 RAM SHRAY RAM V/S UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Mr. VIKAS CHOUDHARY, for the appellant / petitioner Date of Order : 26.5.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI,J. ORDER ----- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has already been given appointment in the year 2001. It is alleged that at the time when his father, the deceased employee died, he was 13 years of age only. However, he had applied for appointment on 5.7.83, but then he has been given appointment in 2001. Suffice it to say that if the petitioner wanted appointment from an earlier date, he should not have waited upto 2001 by sending representations, rather immediately in 1980s itself, he should have approached the competent authority, Court or Tribunal, or whatever the remedy available to him for being appointed. It is then contended that the requisite proforma was sent to the petitioner in the year 1997, while he was given appointment in 2001. In our view, that can hardly furnish any ground for entitling the 2 petitioner for the benefits of service from any retrospective date. Thus, in the totality of circumstances, in our view, no interference is required in the order of the learned Tribunal. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed summarily. ( KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/