JUDGMENT : (Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to refix the seniority of the petitioners in the cadre of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives by reckoning the date of the examination viz. 20.05.1982 conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission for the purpose of fixation of seniority in the cadre of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives and further grant retrospective promotion of the petitioners in the cadre of Industrial Co-operative Officers from the date on which petitioners' juniors were promoted as Industrial C-operative Officers with all consequential benefits such as refixation of pay, arrears of pay, seniority.) 1. Writ Petition is filed for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to refix the seniority of the petitioners in the cadre of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives by reckoning the date of the examination viz. 20.05.1982 conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission for the purpose of fixation of seniority in the cadre of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives and further grant retrospective promotion of the petitioners in the cadre of Industrial Co-operative Officers from the date on which petitioners' juniors were promoted as Industrial C-operative Officers with all consequential benefits such as refixation of pay, arrears of pay, seniority. 2.....(i) According to the petitioners, they were directly appointed as Supervisors of the Industrial Co-operatives on 21.07.1983 by the proceedings of the 1st respondent in 103818/ICE1/83-1, after being successful in the examination conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. They joined the post of Supervisors of Industrial Co-operatives on 01.08.1983 on regular basis. (ii) According to the petitioners, they wrote competitive examination conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission on 20.05.1982. On 16.09.1983, the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission published the bulletin containing the names of the successful candidates, who were selected for the appointment to the post of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives for the year 1981-1982. The respondents 2 & 3 and others were temporarily appointed as Supervisors of Industrial Co-operatives on 29.09.1982 by transfer of service. The post of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives is governed by the Madras Industries Subordinate Service Rules. The respondents 2 & 3 and others were temporarily appointed as Supervisors of Industrial Co-operatives on 29.09.1982 by transfer of service. The post of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives is governed by the Madras Industries Subordinate Service Rules. Under the said Rules, the post of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives can be filled up either by direct recruitment or by promotion of Assistant Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives or for special reasons by recruitment by transfer from other service. When a person is transferred from other service, his age should not be more than 35 years. The respondents 2 & 3 and others have crossed the age limit of 35 years and their appointment as Supervisors of Industrial Co-operatives is ex-facie illegal. (iii) As per Fundamental Rule 26(a)(2), the date of sitting of examination has to be taken into account for conferring title of any rights, benefits or concession and the same should have deemed to be accrued on the day of following the last day of examination or test, which a person has passed. (iv) The 1st respondent published the panel on 31.10.1985 consisting names of 24 persons including respondents 2 and 3 and other similarly placed persons. The names of the petitioners were not included. Even though the 1st respondent has stated that the panel dated 31.10.1985 is a temporary one, they had not published any regular panel and based on the temporary panel, promoted respondents 2 and 3 as Supervisors of Industrial Co-operatives. The petitioners 3 and 5 filed W.P. No. 527 of 1986 challenging the proceedings dated 31.10.1985 and the said writ petition was transferred to the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and renumbered as Tr. Appln. No. 223 of 1993 and subsequently, dismissed for non prosecution. (v) The petitioners were promoted as Industrial Co-operative Officers on various dates from 31.12.1992. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the 1st respondent has not published regular panel and in view of the same, the petitioners were waiting for the seniority list and in the panel on 27.01.1998, the names of the respondents 2 and 3 were not found. (vi) The petitioners have filed present writ petition for re-fixing their seniority in the cadre of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives taking into account the date of examination i.e. 20.05.1982 and grant respective promotion to the petitioners in the post of Industrial Co-operative Officers from the date, when their juniors were promoted. (vi) The petitioners have filed present writ petition for re-fixing their seniority in the cadre of Supervisor of Industrial Co-operatives taking into account the date of examination i.e. 20.05.1982 and grant respective promotion to the petitioners in the post of Industrial Co-operative Officers from the date, when their juniors were promoted. 3. The 1st respondent has filed counter affidavit and denied all the averments and stated that the petitioners have approached this Court after 26 years and if they were aggrieved by the appointment of respondents 2 and 3 and others, they should have challenged the same at that time itself. The 1st respondent has contended that the 2nd respondent was transferred and appointed as Supervisor with effect from 07.04.1980 and 3rd respondent was appointed as Supervisor with effect from 02.05.1980. Both the respondents 2 and 3 were aged 29 and 30 years at the time of transfer and their transfer and appointment as Supervisors of Industrial Co-operative is proper, valid and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record. 5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondents 2 & 3 and others were appointed on 29.09.1982 as Supervisors of Industrial Co-operatives by transfer. According to the petitioners, their transfer and appointment as Supervisors is ex-facie illegal, as they have crossed the age of 35 years at the time of their appointment. The petitioners wrote the examination conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission on 20.05.1982, they were successful in competitive examination, they were selected and appointed as Supervisors of Industrial Co-operatives and therefore their seniority must be counted from the date of examination i.e. on 20.05.1982. The respondents 2 & 3 and others having been appointed by transfer subsequent to the date are juniors to the petitioners. The promotion of respondents 2 & 3 and others as per the panel dated 31.10.1985 is invalid. The petitioners, except 3 and 5 have not challenged the said panel at that time itself. The petitioners 3 and 5 filed W.P. No. 527 of 1986 challenging the said panel and the same was dismissed for non-prosecution after being transferred to the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. 6. The petitioners, except 3 and 5 have not challenged the said panel at that time itself. The petitioners 3 and 5 filed W.P. No. 527 of 1986 challenging the said panel and the same was dismissed for non-prosecution after being transferred to the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. 6. The 1st respondent in the counter affidavit has stated that the writ petition is filed after delay of 26 years and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches, as the petitioners have approached this Court after lapse of 26 years. The reason given by the petitioners for not challenging the panel dated 31.10.1985 is not valid. The petitioners are seeking seniority with effect from 20.05.1982 and promotion with effect from 31.10.1985, when the respondents 2 & 3 and others were promoted on 29.09.1982 claiming that the respondents 2 and 3 are juniors to the petitioners and also claiming consequential benefits. The said relief cannot be granted on the ground of delay and laches. Further, the 1st respondent in the counter affidavit has stated that the 2nd and 3rd respondents were appointed as Supervisors of Industrial Co-operatives on 07.04.1980 and 02.05.1980 respectively and there is nothing on record to reject the said contention of the 1st respondent. 7. For the above reason, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.