Judgment

UNTWALIA, J.:- The sole petitioner in this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India has prayed for a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate directions to the General Manager, Central Railways Bombay - respondent No. 1, to the General Manager, Western Railways -respondent No. 2 and the Union of India, Ministry of Railways, Railway Board, New Delhi - respondent No. 3 to place the petitioner as an Executive Engineer above Shri C. S. Patankar - respondent No. 4 for the purposes of seniority, pay, grade, arrears of pay and further promotions to higher grades and posts and also for a Writ of Mandamus for placing the petitioner in the grade of Rs. 450-575 in the post of Inspector of Works from 1-4-1958 for all purposes. The petition has been resisted by respondent No. 1 on whose behalf a counter-affidavit has also been filed. The petitioner has filed an affidavit in reply.

2. As we proceed to state the facts of the case, it would be clear that this writ petition has got to fail on the ground of delay, laches of the petitioner, his claim being stale and barred by res judicata.

3. The petitioner was appointed in the year 1947 as Inspector of Works in the grade of Rs. 200-300 in the old BB and CI Railway on 28-4-1947 which subsequently became Western Railway. As he was appointed against a "war reserve vacancy" he was confirmed in the same year. On 1-4-1948 the petitioner was promoted to officiate in the post in the grade of Rs. 260-350 and subsequently from 1-10-1948 he was promoted to officiate in the grade of Rs. 360-500. This last promotion was in a fortuitous vacancy and not by selection. The petitioner was reverted to a substantive grade of Rs. 200-300 in the post of Inspector of Works with effect from 1-12-1949. On 17-5-1952 the petitioner was selected for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer, Class II and his name was placed for short-term vacancies as per letter dated 17-5-1952 Ext. 4. The first grievance of the petitioner in paragraph 7 of the Writ petition is that two persons (not parties to this Writ petition) had scored lesser number of marks than the petitioner but they were placed above him. No relief has, however, been claimed on that account.

4. The petitioner s case further is that on 3-12-1952 he was posted as Assistant Engineer by respondent No. 2 telegraphically. The order was confirmed by letter dated 11-12-1952 (Ext. 5). He was posted to officiate as Assistant Engineer, Udaipur in the pay scale of Rs. 350-900 in place of one Shri R. S. Jhaj. But the Regional Engineer, Ajmer wrote a D. O. letter dated 10-12-1952 (Ext. 6) to the Chief Engineer, Bombay, objecting to the petitioner s posting as Assistant Engineer at Udaipur. As a result of his interference, the petitioner s promotion was wrongly withheld. The action of the Regional Engineer was motivated. An enquiry had been started against the petitioner in November, 1952 by respondent No. 2 for his alleged action of making false allegations against his superiors. The petitioner states that on the intervention of the then Minister of Railways, the enquiry against him was dropped but he did not get his promotion. Even though there had been selections for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer in 1953-54 in the Western Railways, the petitioner was not called for selection as his conduct was said to be under enquiry. In 1955 there was a selection for the post of Assistant Engineer. The petitioner was called but was sent back on the ground that his conduct was under enquiry. On 1-10-1954 however the petitioner was promoted in the post of Inspector of Works in the grade of Rupees 260-350/- but he did not get his promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. In October, 1955 the services of the petitioner were transferred from Western Railways to Central Railways. In June, 1955 there was a selection for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer in the Central Railways. In this selection respondent No; 4 and three more persons named in para