Laxmi Narain Mittal, J. - (1.) NEELAM Chaudhary, by way of instant writ petition, seeks promotion to the post of Senior Lecturer, to which post respondent no.4 - Ashok Kumar Deswal has been promoted vide order dated 23.04.2007 (Annexure P -6). Initial appointment of respondent no.4 vide order dated 19.09.1997 has also been assailed in the writ petition.
(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file. 3. Without going into merits of the case, the instant writ petition to assail appointment of respondent no.4, as Lecturer vide order dated 19.09.1997 and as Senior Lecturer vide order dated 23.04.2007, is barred by delay and laches. Faced with the aforesaid situation, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that respondent no.4 is being considered for promotion as Head of the Department, whereas the petitioner is not even being considered for the post of Senior Lecturer. However, the petitioner would not have any vested right to be appointed as Senior Lecturer even though the petitioner may be eligible for the said post fulfilling the eligibility conditions. If respondent no.3 College decides to appoint anybody as Senior Lecturer and if at that stage, the petitioner is not considered, the petitioner may get some cause of action, but at this stage, no direction can be issued to respondent no.3 to consider the petitioner for the post of Senior Lecturer. On the contrary, the petitioner has to be considered for the said post in accordance with law only as and when the said post is sought to be filled.
(3.) IN view of the aforesaid, the instant writ petition is dismissed in limine.;