Belated claims for service benefits not entertained if they unsettle settled positions in service law; petitioners must demonstrate similarity of standing to succeed.

Judgment :

Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.

Preface

1. Two employees of the Damodar Valley Corporation (for short, “DVC”) have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon‟ble Court through the present writ petition, alleging hostile discrimination and unequal treatment in respect of appointment to the post of Dozer Operator Grade-III, as well as in the grant of service-related benefits, including promotion and other consequential benefits. They further claim to be similarly situated as three other employees, namely Gopal Roy, Sahin Aktar, and Trilochan Singh, and seek the grant of such service- related benefits with effect from the date on which Gopal Roy and the other two employees were so granted.

2. During the pendency of the writ petition, Petitioner No. 2 unfortunately expired. As the legal heirs of Petitioner No. 2 did not express any intention to be substituted in his place, the writ petition is now being pursued solely by Petitioner No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Petitioner”).

Petitioners’ Case

3. For a proper appreciation of the issues involved in the writ petition, it is considered appropriate to set out the facts, as projected in the writ petition, which are delineated below:

i) Way back in 1991, the DVC initiated a selection process to fill up the 10 numbers of vacancy in the post of „Dozer Operator, Grade-III‟. Accordingly, through an advertisement vide. no. 91/18 published in a newspaper, The Telegraph on 5.5. 1991, applications were invited from the eligible and intending candidates for the posts. Out of 10 (ten) posts, four (4) were reserved for candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes and one (1) post for a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Tribes, while the remaining six (6) posts were unreserved.

ii) In response to the said advertisement, petitioner, being duly qualified, submitted his candidature for the post. He was called to appear in the practical test -cum-interview and, upon successfully clearing the same, his name was placed at serial no. 5 in the panel, which was published on 1.3.1992.

iii) However, certain candidates, including the petitioners, raised objections on the ground that although nearly 32 posts of Dozer Operator, Grade-III were lying vacant, the selection process was discontinued after granting appointment to a few candidates in violation of the order of merit and three Ex-Service men were appointed to those posts.

iv) These incidents prompted the petitioner and four other candidates to prefer a writ petition, C.O. no. 15440 of 1995, before this Hon'ble Court. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the writ petition by an order dated 02.04.1998. The operative portion of the order dated 02.04.1998, which reads as follows:

“This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction upon the respondent Corporation to fill up the 6 posts of Dozor Operators grade III Post 91/18 in so far as General category candidates are concerned strictly adhering to the ranking assigned by the Selection Board and if any of the petitioners come within such eligibility criteria they may be considered for appointment to one of the 6 posts in the General Category. The respondents shall complete the said exercise within a period of 2 months from the date hereof and also communicate their decision to the petitioners, if any or all of them are found not entitled to be offered the post the reason therefor.”

v) The DVC filed an application for review; however, the same was dismissed. Consequently, petitioner, along with som