- (1.) It is admitted position that the petitioner after having been appointed as a Steno-typist on 2.6.1975 on temporary basis, was given regular appointment as Clerk w.e.f. 1.1.1980. He was thereafter promoted as Accountant on 29.4.1993. In the seniority list of Accountants as it stood on 1.1.1996, his date of appointment as Clerk has been shown to be 1.1.1980 and his seniority has been fixed at Sr. No. 126. The aforementioned seniority list was revised on 31.3.2001 and the seniority number of the petitioner was changed to Sr. No. 75. The names of the private respondents have been shown at Sr. Nos. 38 (Rama Rani), 48 (Charanjit Singh), 50 (Ram Karn) and 36 (Waryam Singh). Accordingly, respondent Nos. 4 to 6 being senior to the petitioner, have been further promoted to the post of Block Development and Panchayat Officer. At this stage, firstly the petitioner approached this Court by filing C.W.P. No. 15091 of 2003, which was disposed of by this Court on 22.9.2003 by directing the official respondents to decide the representation made by the petitioner on 8.7.2002. The official respondents have rejected the representation made by the petitioner on 30.11.2003 (P-5) by passing a speaking order and the same reads as under: Recruitment of Sh. Daryao Singh, presently Accountant, department of Development and Panchayat Officer, Israna, who was appointed as a clerk through Employment Exchange on order of Deputy Secretary Development and Directorate of Panchayat, Haryana, order No. KL-75/15658 dated 2.6.1979 was done completely on temporary basis for a period of six months, thereafter the services of the employees were regularized w.e.f. 1.1.1980, vide Govt. notification No. G.S.R./COWST/8/309/80 and accordingly the seniority was fixed as a clerk by this department on the basis of his seniority. The employee was promoted to the post of accountant on 29.4.1993. Thereafter, the seniority of the employees was fixed at Sr. No. 26, as per the factual position of the then present department accounts as on 1.1.1996. Whereas as per the position on 31.3.2001 the tentative seniority list the then departmental accounts seniority of this employee was fixed at sr. No. 75 as clarified above that the present employee was appointed as a clerk on temporary basis for a period of six months on 6.6.1975 and after vide notification of the govt. his services were regularised on 1.1.1980. Therefore the employee can not be given the benefit of adhoc service in view of the govt. instructions issued vide letter No. 1028-G-TT/57/27804 dated 29.3.1957 in fixation his seniority. The confirmation of this fact has also been done vide letter of Chief Secretary Govt. of Haryana, ordinary service branch/general service letter No. 11/1/2003-2/GST dated 21.3.2003, in view of which the employee was informed about filing of his application dated 10.12.2002 after its consideration vide letter No. 1- 5-67-I-ECD-TT-03/8842 dated 7.4.2003 of this department. In view of the aforesaid circumstances it is stated that the application of the employee dated 8.7.2002 alongwith copy of Writ Petition No. 15091 of 2003 filed before the Honble Punjab and Haryana High Court, as Annexure P-4 is not as per rules and has no merit. Therefore, it is not found acceptable to me.
(2.) It is, thus, evident that all along the date of appointment of the petitioner on the post of Clerk has been taken to be 1.1.1980, which was the date of his regularisation on the aforementioned post. The claim of the petitioner that he is required to be considered as Clerk w.e.f. 2.6.1975 as he was appointed in a regular manner by requisitioning his name from Employment Exchange and then by selection, is wholly belated. It is well settled that the settled things cannot be un-settled so as to cause prejudice to all those who have taken the seniority position as settled. The petitioner has been promoted on the basis of his seniority as Accountant on 29.4.1993 and he cannot reopen the issue of seniority by claiming that his appointment as Clerk should be ante-dated to 2.6.1975. In that regard we draw support from a Constitution Bench judgment of Honble the Supreme Court in the case of Rabindra Nath Bose v. Union of India . In that case also there was inordinate delay in raising a challenge to the seniority list, which was rejected being belated. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the instant petition.
(3.) Dismissed.;