Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The writ petitioner is the appellant. The respondents herein were the respondents in the writ petition. The appellant, who is a Physical Education Teacher of Fatima Mata College, Kollam, approached this Court, feeling aggrieved by the stand of the Government in Ext.P11 communication dated 28.2005 that she is eligible to get U.G.C scale of pay only on completion of eight years service, that is only with effect from 6.1998.

2. The brief facts of the case are the following: The appellant was appointed in the 4th respondents College as Lecturer in Physical Education on 6.1990, by Ext.P1 order. By Ext.P2 order dated 210.1992, the said appointment was approved by the University of Kerala with effect from 6.1990. By Ext.P3 communication dated 210.1993, the Government informed the Director of Collegiate Education that one Physical Education Teacher in each college where the number of students under Degree/P.G. Course is 1000 or below, will be brought under the U.G.C scheme. Other Physical Education Teachers who are not eligible to come under the scheme will be granted U.G.C scales on completion of eight years service. This was followed by Ext.P5 Government order dated 23.1998, wherein it is stated that in every college where there are Degree and P.G. Courses, there will be at least one post of Physical Education Teacher under the U.G.C scheme.

3. In the meantime, the University of Kerala amended its Regulations by Ext.P4 resolution notified on 7.4.1997, providing that teachers appointed/re-appointed after 13.1990 but before 210.1992 are exempted from passing the National Eligibility Test and academic qualifications prescribed by the U.G.C. By virtue of the above resolution, any hurdle that stood in the way of the appellant being paid the U.G.C scale of pay was removed. Thereupon, her Principal addressed Ext.P6 communication on 10.3.1999 to the Director of Collegiate Education, to sanction U.G.C scale of pay for the appellant. It was followed by Ext.P7 communication dated 28.7.2000 addressed by her Principal to the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education. Kollam. The Deputy Director recommended her case to the Director by Ext.P8 communication dated 210.2000. The appellants Principal followed up the matter by addressing Ext.P9 representation dated 18.5.2001 to the Deputy Director. Along with Ext.P9, details regarding students strength for the years 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93 were also furnished. It would show that the students strength at Degree and P.G. level was above 1800 for all the three years. Later, the appellant filed Ext.P10 representation before the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education, praying to grant her U.G.C scale of pay. In the meantime, the matter was pending before the Government, on the motion made by the Director of Collegiate Education. Finally, the Government, by Ext.P11 communication dated 28.2005, informed the Director that the appellant is eligible for U.G.C scale of pay on completion of eight years service with effect from 6.1998. Reliance was placed on Ext.P5, to take the said stand. Aggrieved by Ext.P11, the writ petition was filed. The appellant/writ petitioner submitted that as per the relevant orders, she is entitled to get U.G.C scale of pay from 6.1990, the date on which she was appointed. She was appointed in a vacancy created by the retirement of a Physical Education Teacher, who was covered by the U.G.C scheme introduced in 1986. Therefore, there was no justification for not granting the benefit to her, it is submitted.

4. The 1st respondent did not file any counter affidavit. But, respondents 2 and 3 filed separate counter affidavits, practically supporting the claim of the appellant. But, the learned Single Judge was not inclined to grant the reliefs sought by the appellant. It was found that she was guilty of delay and laches. She was sleeping over her rights. The relevant portion of the said judgment reads as follows:

"3. I am not inclined to consider the clai