1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPELATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPELATE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6207 OF 2000 WRIT PETITION NO.6207 OF 2000 WRIT PETITION NO.6207 OF 2000 L.V.Subbarao ..Petitioner Vs. Union of India & Ors. ..Respondents ----- Mr.S.P.Saxena for Petitioner CORAM: F.I. REBELLO & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO & S.P. KUKDAY, JJ. S.P. KUKDAY, JJ. S.P. KUKDAY, JJ. DATE: 7TH MARCH, 2005. DATE: 7TH MARCH, 2005. DATE: 7TH MARCH, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. . From the para four of the Judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal, we find that the Petitioner challenges the seniority-list. The Petitioner approached the Tribunal in the year 1994. The learned Tribunal held that the Petitioner had not provided the documents which were essential for the purpose of consideration. Subsequently also observed that the Application was delayed and accordingly dismissed the application. . It is the case of the Petitioner that he was making representations and the matters were pending in the Apex Court. Even if the Petition has to be allowed a review D.P.C. will have to be held. Persons likely to be affected are not parties to the O.A. Petitioner could be given benefit only if the holder of the post, which post the Petitioner claims 2 is reverted, that cannot be done without hearing such party likely to be affected. In the light of that no interference is called for. Petition rejected. (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (S.P. KUKDAY,J.) (S.P. KUKDAY,J.) (S.P. KUKDAY,J.)