HIGH COWT OF €HHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WrH Pzfi'rion No. 2639 af 2002 Pdifiomr J. Sarada Rani aged about 41 years W/o MP. Phaneandra Kumar R/o Qt. No. Type II/Bank-coiony/378 Bacheli, Disft — Danfewada (6.6.) Versus 1. Sfafe of Chho'r?isgarh Through Direcfor Schoo! Educafion Pension Sada, Raipur (C.6.) 2. DAV College Managing Commiifee Chih-a Gup'ra Marg New Delhi- 110055 3. The Regional Director D.A.V. schools, MP/CG Zone Hudco Bhilai District— Out-g (6.6.) 4. Na‘l'ianal Mineral Development Corparal’ion Bacheli‘ Districl- Danfewada (6.6.) C/o 6eneml Manager Bacheli, District- Donfewada (6.6.) 5. The Principal D.A.V. Public School Bacheli, B.I.O.P. Deposi‘re No. 5 NMDC Disfricf- Daniewad (Goa) Single Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Jusiice Salish K. Agnihom. Present : Mr. 5. Shashidharm, Advocate and Mr. Jifendra Pali, Advocate for The petitioner. ' Ms. Deepli Pondey, Panel Lwyer- for the Slate/responder»? No. 1. Mr. Ami? Verma, Advocate for lhe respondenfs No. 2, 3 & 5. Mr. Vivek Kumar Verma, Advocafe for fhe respondent No. 4. O R D E R (Passed on 5‘“ Day of April, 2007) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner seems to be aggrieved by non grant of appointment order pursuant to the interview before the Selection Committee, for regularization on the basis of letter dated 17.10.1994 (Annexure P/3). He further submits that the M NeanM’M a 2 @ pefifioner- was grnnfed increhenf vide order dafed 22.7.1996 wifhouf passing any order for regularizafion of his service as he was appoinfed as cd-hoc Teacher vide arder dated 28.6.1994 (Annexure P—2). 2. If appears fhaf fhe pefi‘rioner' has fhereaffer appeared before The Selection Commi‘r'ree for appointmenf on The posf of Teacher in pre- primary schoo! on ad-hoc basis. Appoinfmenf 'e‘rfer dafed 22.6.1998 (Annexure P-5) makes if clear that the petitioner was appointed as ad-hac Teacher, purely on temporary basis, an fixed pay of Rs. 3000/- per month. Thereafter, again one more order was passed on 5.9.2001 (Annexure P—7), granting a pay-scale of Rs. 3050-4590/- to the petitioner as a Teacher for pre-primary with effect from the date of joining. 3. After having availed his joining pursuant to letter dated 22.6.1998 (Annexure Pe5), which was for a period till 6.5.1999, the petitioner seeks to challenge the consequential order proposed to be passed after interview on the basis of letter dated 17.10.1994 (Annexure P/3). 4. The petitioner has filed this petition on 22.11.2002, when the cause of action arose in October, 1994. Thereafter, the petitioner has obtained second order for appointment and further for grant of regular pay-scale. The petitioner has not taken any step for a period of more than 8 years. 5. It is well settled that High Court in exercise of its discretion does not ordinarily assist the tardy and the indolent or the acquiescent and the lethargic as the belated approach may have fhe effec? of inflicting not only hardship as inconvenience but also injustice on Third parties. (See Jaydiolt Mmin Malfiar Vs. Tile $fufe of Bihar & R5. 5adasivaswmy Vs. .51we of Tamil Mduz, 5fm‘2 of MP. & ofbel-s Vs. Nandla/ Jaiswl and oflms", Bum 5fandard Ca. LM. & ofller: Vs. Dimbandhu Mqiumdar '& mofber’ Md Kamafulm Power tomorafion Lfd. Mmigli If: tbairman & Manogim Direcior i ammr Vs. K. 771W!) i anofoor’}. 6. Thus, ‘ihis writ petition deserves to be dismissed on the ground of inordinate delay. No order as to costs. / Satish K. Agnihotri {999? or AIR 1973 SC 1343 AIR 1974 5C 2271 (1986) 4 SCC 566 (1995) 4 SCC 172 (2006) 4 sec 322 momws