^ lf HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH c^) CORAM: HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA. CJ. Writ Appeal No. 219 of 2010 T.P. Prajapati, aged about 59 years, S/o Shri K.P. Prajapati Principal, at present posted at Government Higher Secondary School Rajpur, dlstt. Sarguja (C.G.) 2. 3. State of Madhya Pradesh now State of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, Adim Jati Harijan Avam Pichra Verg, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur The Director Adivasi Vikas Bhopal now at Raipur (C.G.) Dy. Director, Adim JatiKalyan Vibhag, Ambikapur, Sarguja (C.G.) (Appeal to Division Benchl Act, 2006 Present: Shri D.N. Prajapati, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Kishore Bhaduri, learned Additional Advocate General for the State/ respondents. th The follovi/ing order the Court was passed Learned counsel for the parties are heard on admission. ^s^f%. 2) Appellant T.P. Prajapati, has fiied this writ appeal against the impugned order dated 14-06-2010, passed in W.P.(S) No. 741/2005. 3) The appellant/ petitioner fi!ed Original Application before the State Administratlve Tribunal, which later on, on the abolition ofthe State Administrative Tribunal came to be registered as writ petition in the High Court; forthe following reliefs: "(i) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents that seniority of the applicant be count on the post of Principal from 27-06-1984 when junior to the applicant promoted on the post of principa]; (ii) That the hon'ble Tribunal may kindly be directed to the respondent to pay the saiary, increments and other benefits to the applicant from the date from which juniors are getting i.e. 27-06-84; and (iii) That any other relief which this hon'bie Tribunal may deem frt and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in favour of the applicant in the interest of justice together with cost and of these proceedings." 4) The petitioner, thus in substance, was seeking a direction to the respondents to grant notional promotion to the petitioner on the post of Principal with effect from 27-06-1984, when juniors to the appeilanV petitioner were promoted to the post of Principal. 5) The appellant, who was initially appointed in the year 1973, was promoted to the post of Principal on 30-07-1990. Prior to his promotion as Principat, he made a representation seeking his promotion to the post of Principal, which was dismissed by the ''l t, ."~'<Q '^^ fo4 State Authorities on 02-09-1987. The Original Application was filed by the appellant/ petitioner before the State Administrative Tribunal in the year 1993 i.e. after six years of the dismissal of his representation and after three years of his promotion to the post of Prindpai. 6) Learned Singie Judge taking note of the above mentioned sequence of events held that the Original Application, which later on was converted in a writ petition, suffered from de!ay and laches. Learned Singie Judge, therefore, dismissed the appellant's writ petition on She ground of delay and laches. 7) Shri D.N. Prajapati, learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the learned Single Judge has erred in dismissing the appeilant's writ petition on the ground of delay and laches without any objection by the respondents in that behalf. 8) Be that as it may, the fact remains that the appellant/ petitioner filed the Original Appiication (writ petition) after six years of the dismissal of his representation. The exptanation offered by the appellant for the delay of six years is not at all convincing. 9) We, therefore, do not find any good ground warranting interference in this intra Court appeal. 10V The writ appeal, therefore, is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. i'\ Sd/- ChiefJustice fi Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge subbu