Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1999 DIGILAW 1137 (RAJ)

C. R. Raichandani v. State of Rajasthan

1999-09-06

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA

body1999
JUDGMENT 1. - Main relief sought by the petitioner in the instant writ petition is to quash he seniority list dated December 31, 1988 in so far as to fix the seniority of the petitioner at S.No. 824. Quashing of amendment of the Rajasthan Engineering Subordinate Service (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1967 brought about by two Notifications dated August 5, 1981 and Sept. 24, 1983 has also been prayed for. 2. The petitioner had instituted S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 198/85 in the Principal Seat of this Court at Jodhpur which was disposed of on Feb. 3, 1986 thus - "It is agreed by both the learned counsel that the impugned seniority list will be treated as a tentative seniority list. The petitioner and other persons may file their objections to this impugned seniority list, if they are aggrieved. The respondent State of Rajasthan and the Chief Engineer, should invite objections from other persons also who are not petitioners. After hearing petitioner and other persons who filed the objection to this seniority list, a fresh seniority list may be issued. Meanwhile the position of the petitioner shall be maintained as it exists today till the finalisation of seniority list. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of." In pursuance to this order the respondent State of Rajasthan had published seniority list dated December 31, 1988. I have perused the material on record. The impugned seniority list seeks to treat all the screened persons as regular with effect from June 30, 1978 in view of the Notification dated August 5, 1981 and Sept. 24, 1983 after due consideration of the petitioner's is representation. The petitioner had assailed the validity of the said Notification in the year 1989 by filing the instant writ petition. Evidently the petition suffers from delay and latches. Since the rights of the parties inter se have crystallised, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. 3. The writ petition fails and stands dismissed. No costs.Writ Petition dismissed. *******