The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of timely action and the impact of delay on settled positions, as emphasized by the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

Mansoor Ahmad Mir, J.

1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16.7.2010, made by the learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP (T) No. 5083 of 2008, titled Babu Ram versus State of H.P. and others, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner came to be allowed, for short “the impugned judgment”, on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal.

Brief facts.

2. Babu Ram petitioner came to be appointed as Electrician Grade-I vide Annexure A1 in HP Public Works Department, hereinafter referred to as “PWD” for short. He was promoted as Foreman (Electrical) Vide order dated 23.9.1987, Annexure A2 and relieved on 14.12.1987, for reporting his duty to Irrigation & Public Health Department Division No.2, hereinafter referred to as the I&PH Department” for short and vide order dated 18.12.1987 Annexure A3, petitioner joined as such at Jagroti Pumping Station and is serving as such till today.

3. On 22.9.1984 the State Government made a decision to bifurcate PWD and I & PH Departments into two separate and independent Departments, which was actually materialized on 27.4.1994. Petitioner remained with the I & PH Department and accordingly, provisional seniority list of work charge Foreman working in I&PH Department was issued vide Annexure A5 dated 30.9.1997. The name of petitioner was figuring at Sr. No. 3 of the said list.

4. Annexure A4 is the final seniority list of Electrician Grade-I which was issued by the PWD, on 17.6.1986 before bifurcation and name of the petitioner was figuring at Sr. No. 11 and names of junior to the petitioner, namely Natha Ram and Shri Om Parkash were figuring at Sr. No. 12 and 13 respectively of the said seniority list.

5. Vide Annexure A6 dated 21.3.1998, two employees, namely Natha Ram and Shri Om Parkash, who were junior to the petitioner were promoted to the post of Junior Engineer (Electrical). It is only after noticing this, the petitioner filed Original Application No. 870 of 1998, and sought the writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to allocate the services of the applicant to P.W.D. and his seniority may be maintained in the cadre of Foreman (Electrical) in P.W.D. Department and also to promote the applicant as Junior Engineer (Electrical) from the date his juniors have been promoted with all consequential benefits.

6. The said Original Application, on abolition of the HP State Administrative Tribunal, came to be transferred to this Court and registered as CWP (T) No. 5083 of 2008, subject matter of this LPA.

7. The petitioner has made the foundation of the said reliefs, as per the grounds contained in paras 6 (i) to 6 (viii) in the said petition.

8. The respondents have filed the reply and resisted the petition on the ground that petitioner was promoted on 16.12.1987 and he joined in I & PH Department. A conscious decision was made by the Government in the year 1984 to create two separate departments and were functioning separately as such but a final decision was taken on 27.4.1994, as discussed hereinabove. The services of the officers/officials/employees were allocated to the I & PH Department on “As is where is” basis. The seniority list was issued by the I & PH Department Annexure A5 appended to the Original Application. The petitioner had not questioned the said decision or raised any finger for posting him in I &PH Department. The petitioner has also not questioned the decisions made thereafter.

9. The writ respondents/appellant herein have specifically denied paras 6 (i) to 6 (viii) of the Original Application. Further they have pleaded that the Original Application filed by the petitioner was time barred.

10. It is apt to record herein that the petitioner has not filed any rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents. Thus, the averments contained in the reply have remained un-rebutted.

11. The petitioner has remained contented right from 18.12.1987 till his juniors were promoted and has not sought any relief qua the decision made on 27.4.1994 and seni