IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 1388 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: June 30, 2010 Dalip Singh and others …Appellants Versus State of Haryana and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present: Mr. S.K. Sud, Advocate, for the appellants. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. This appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent challenges order dated 20.10.2009, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 4565 of 2008. The finding of the learned Single Judge is that the seniority list issued on 13.5.1967 has been disputed by the petitioners with a prayer for grant of notional promotion from the date their juniors were promoted. The prayer was that the merit determined by the Subordinate Service Selection Board in the year 1961 should have been maintained. Learned Single Judge has found that there was no valid explanation explaining the delay. The reliance on the Division Bench judgment rendered in the case of Room Chand and others v. State of Haryana and others (CWP No. 9978 of 1988, decided on 18.8.2005, Annexure P-2) has also been negated on the ground that the writ LPA No. 1388 of 2009 petition in that case was filed in the year 1988. Learned Single Judge has rightly held that third party rights have come into existence as number of persons have been promoted. Those persons were not even made party respondents in the writ petition. It is well settled that the issues concerning seniority cannot be raked up after huge delay. In the present case the delay is more than 40 years and the same cannot be condoned. In that regard we may place reliance on a 7-Judge Constitution Bench judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Rabindra Nath Bose v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 470. Consequently, the appeal is without any merit and the same is dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (A.N. JINDAL) June 30, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor 2