Prem Chandra Arya v. State Of U.P. Thru. ...

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

LUCKNOW

WRIT - A No. - 11044 of 2025 Court No. - 4

HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.

Heard. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 25.2.2021, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the writ petition, as issued by the respondent no. 1 to the extent that it has determined and altered the seniority of the petitioner.

Also under challenge is the order dated 31.8.2015, a copy of which is annexure 2 to the writ petition, by which the seniority of the petitioner has been altered from 17.2.2009 to 3.8.2015. Vide order dated 25.2.2021, in the tentative seniority list issued on 31.12.2019 the respondents have fixed the final seniority of various persons including the private respondents at serial no. 1 as clearly emerge from perusal of the said order. Thus, the petitioner is aggrieved by fixation of his seniority after more than four and half years.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shiba Shankar Mohapatra and others vs. State of Orissa and others -

(2010) 12 SCC 471 after placing reliance on various earlier judgments including the judgment of K.R. Mudgal vs. R.P.

Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Siddharth Rao Anand, Samta Rao, Surya Bali

Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Prem Chandra Arya

.....Petitioner(s)

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Housing And Urban Planning Deptt. Lko And 4

Others .....Respondent(s)

1

Singh - (1986) 4 SCC 531 has held that three to four years is a reasonable period for challenging the seniority. Instant writ petition being filed after a period of four and half years without indicating the reason for filing the same after such a long period of time. Thus, it is clearly hit by the principle of law as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of

Shiba Shankar Mohapatra (supra).

Considering the aforesaid, no case for interference is made out. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

September 18, 2025

J. K. Dinkar WRIA No. 11044 of 2025

2

(Abdul Moin,J.)

2