T. Appunni, U.D. Clerk (Higher Grade) vs Commissioner for Rural Development, Assistant Development Commissioner and State of Kerala

S. Siri Jagan, J.—The petitioner entered service as an L.D. Clerk on 22.7.1987 and was promoted as U.D. Clerk on 4.1.2000. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was overlooked for promotion on 31.8.1990, since the petitioner did not pass the obligatory departmental test. According to the petitioner, as per Rule 13A of the KS&SSR, for scheduled caste and scheduled tribe employees, want of test qualification is not a complete bar for promotion. The only requirement is that after promotion within a period of three years, they should have obtained the test qualification. But the petitioner was not given that benefit, is the petitioner''s grievance. By Ext.P1 order dated 2.12.2005 the petitioner''s claim in this respect was rejected. The petitioner''s further representation to the Government was also rejected by Ext.P3 order dated 25.1.2008. In the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs;

(a) call for the records leading to Ext.P1 and Ext.P3 and quash the same by the issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari or other appropriate writ order or direction;

(b) direct the respondents by the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction to grant retrospective promotion to the petitioner as U.D. Clerk with effect from 14.1.1997 with all consequential benefits;

(c) direct the 3rd respondent by the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction to consider Ext.P6 representation after affording an opportunity for a hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

I am of opinion that it is too late in the day for the petitioner to seek the above reliefs. Ext.P1 is dated 2.1.2005 and Ext.P3 is dated 25.1.20038. The petitioner has not chosen to challenge the same within a reasonable time. The petitioner now seeks retrospective promotion from 14.1.1997, which is also hopelessly hit by unexplained delay and laches. Therefore, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition at this stage. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed on account of unexplained delay and laches on the part of the petitioner.