IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. LPA No. 21 of 2008. Decided on: May 13, 2010 Union of India and others ….. Appellants. Versus Sant La and others …… Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. For the Appellants : Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Asstt. Solicitor General of India. For the Respondents: Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate for respondent No.1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) Union of India and the official respondents have come up in appeal against the judgment dated 22nd August, 2007 in CWP No. 313 of 2001. 2. The Writ Petition was filed by the first respondent herein. He approached this Court with certain grievances with regard to seniority, unsettled by the appellants herein after fourteen years of publication of final seniority list, on representation filed by the respondents No. 2 to 6 herein. The Writ Petition was allowed and thus, the appeal by the Union of India. 2 3. At the outset, it has to be noted that the private respondents herein respondents No. 2 to 6 who are really affected persons have not even cared to appear before this Court either to support the appellants or by way of separate appeal. Be that as it may. We find that the main ground on which the learned Single Judge has taken the decision is that the final seniority list of Sub Inspectors had been finalized as early as in 1986 and only after fourteen years the same was unsettled, on a representation filed by the private respondents. The learned Single Judge has also taken note of the undisputed factual position that the Writ Petitioner had been appointed as Sub Inspector in 1978 whereas the party respondents were appointed in that cadre only in the year 1980. It is also seen that the seniority list thus finalized in 1986 had been acted upon for further promotions and at that time also the private respondents did not have any demur. It is now settled law that once the seniority is settled and the same has ruled the field for a considerable long time, even if there be any factual error or otherwise in the seniority list, the same shall not be interfered with ordinarily. In the instant case as already noted above, the final seniority list was in operation for over fourteen years but the same was upset, apparently without notice to the Writ Petitioner, the affected party. At any rate, the private respondents do not seem to have any grievance with the judgment rendered by the Single Judge which is sought to be assailed only by the Union of India. It is also significant in this context to note that the appellants attempted to interfere with the final seniority only on the representation filed by the private respondents and not on their own. 4. For all above reasons, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the learned Single Judge in allowing the Writ Petition 3 holding that the seniority list which has attained the finality and was operated for fourteen years cannot be interfered with on a representation filed by the persons who did not have any grievance for over fourteen years. The Letters Patent Appeal is accordingly dismissed. 5. We also make it clear that in case the needful action as directed by the Single Judge has not been taken owing to the pendency of the appeal, now that the appeal is dismissed, the needful shall be done within a period of two months from today. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice May 13, 2010 (Justice Deepak Gupta), (rks) Judge.