JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the tentative seniority list dated 06.07.2009, issued by the Secretary, Higher Education, respondent no.1, and after that he should be promoted, as he was eligible at that time; a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the arrears of salary to the petitioner for promotional post; and, a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to revise the pension of the petitioner accordingly.

2. Facts, to the extent necessary, are that the petitioner, resident of Najibabad, District Bijnor (Uttar Pradesh), was appointed to the post of Lecturer Commerce vide appointment letter dated 14.12.1975. He was promoted to the post of Reader in the year, 1988. At the time of the creation of the State of Uttarakhand, he had represented to the Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow to change his cadre General/Field to Hill. The respondent no.1 issued a Office Memorandum on 11.06.2001, whereby 31 Lecturers were relieved for State of Uttar Pradesh. The name of the petitioner was at serial no.29. The petitioner was transferred for State of Uttar Pradesh vide letter dated 10.07.2007. He moved a representation dated 20.07.2007 and on the consent of both the State, the Government of Uttar Pradesh had given its consent to change the option of the petitioner for the State of Uttarakhand. From November, 2000 to 30.12.2008, his name was neither included in the seniority list nor promoted, therefore, he moved a representation on 30.12.2008 to the Principal Secretary with a request to include his name in the seniority list of Higher Education Department and to consider his promotion.

3. On 06.07.2009, Higher Education Department issued a tentative seniority list of employees of category “A" and published the same in the newspaper “Amar Ujala" on 07.07.2009. Since the cadre of the petitioner was changed, therefore, his name should be placed at serial no.107 in the tentative seniority list. All Associate Professors, whose name were mentioned at serial no.108 to 118 in the tentative seniority list of the year, 2009, were promoted to the post of Principal in the year, 2009. All these Associate Professors were junior to him. Since the respondents did not include the name of the petitioner in the tentative seniority list of the year, 2009 and did not take any action on his representation dated 30.12.2008, he submitted his representations on 08.07.2009 and 09.12.2009. The nomenclature of the post of Reader was changed as Associate Professor in the year, 2009 and the petitioner had completed more than 20 years service as Reader/Associate Professor in the year, 2009, he was entitled for promotion to the post of Professor. But, in spite of repeated request, neither the name of the petitioner was included in the seniority list of Associate Professor nor he was given promotion to the post of Professor.

4. The petitioner has retired from his service on 30.04.2011. The mother of the petitioner was on bed and the petitioner was busy in her treatment, therefore, he could not approach to the Court. The name of one Dr. Dinesh Sharma, Associate Professor, was not included in the seniority list. He had filed a Writ Petition (No.66/2016 (S/B)) before this Court and this Court vide its order dated 03.04.2018, disposed of the said writ petition with the direction to the respondents to decide his representation for inclusion his name in the seniority list dated 14.10.2011. Thereafter, the respondent no.1 included the name of Dr. Dinesh Sharma in the seniority list at serial no.91 Ka and he was promoted to the post of Principal. When it came into the knowledge of the petitioner, he moved a representation to the respondent no.1 on 16.12.2020.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

6. It is well settled law that the settled seniority should not be unsettled after a lapse of time.

7. In Rabindra Nath Bose and Others