Judgment :

1.1. One Hamiddulah Dar was an Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police. He was granted promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector illegally upon relaxing the prescribed Rules in the year 1987. Seven persons said to be similarly situated asked for similar treatment.

2.2. SWP No.519 of 1987 was filed by one of them, named Abdul Rashid Rather, a Constable. It was allowed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court by an order dated 24th September, 1998. A Letters Patent Appeal filed thereagainst was dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court by its order dated 30th July, 1999. It is stated that a Special Leave Petition filed against the said order was also dismissed by this Court.

3. Another writ petition was filed by four persons, namely – Maharaj Krishan Bhatt, Mohammad Amin, Bansilal Bhatt and Mohammad Abbas Najar in the year 1997, which was registered as SWP No.3735 of 1997, praying for their promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector with effect from the date on which Hamiddulah Dar, who was said to be junior to the petitioners, was promoted. A learned Single Judge of the High Court allowed the

said writ petition by an order dated 30th April, 2001. On an intra court appeal having been preferred, a Division Bench of the said Court by its order dated 11th October, 2002 allowed the same. A Special Leave Petition was filed thereagainst by Maharaj Krishan Bhatt and Bansi Lal Bhatt before this Court. Special leave having granted, the matter was registered as Civil Appeal Nos. 8481-8482 of 2003. A Division Bench of this Court allowed the said appeal by an order dated 1st August, 2008 which has since been reported in 2008 (9) SCC 24.

3.4. Petitioner filed a writ petition which was registered as SWP No. 742 of 2000. It was allowed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court by his order dated 4th December, 2003. Letters Patent Appeal filed by the State of Jammu and Kashmir, however, has been allowed by reason of the impugned judgment and order dated 19th March, 2009.

4.5. Petitioner is, thus, before us.

5.6. Mr. D.K. Garg, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would contend that the Division Bench of the High Court committed a serious error in passing the impugned judgment in so far as it failed to take into consideration that delay or latches alone could be a ground for discriminating the petitioner vis-à-vis five others, who were similarly situated. Our attention was drawn to the fact that pursuant to the judgment of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, the petitioners name was recommended by the Executive Branch of the State. Even a draft order of promotion was placed before Honble the Chief Minister. However, the said relief had not been granted despite an appropriate representation having been filed by the petitioner. Later the Letters Patent Appeal was filed by the State, which as noticed earlier, has been allowed by the impugned judgment.

6.7. Abdul Rashid Rather, who was said to be junior to the petitioner, as we have noticed heretobefore, had filed writ petition in the year 1987. It was decided on 24th September, 1998. Petitioner admittedly filed the writ petition in the year 2000 after the writ petition filed by Abdul Rashid Rather attained finality, as the order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court was given effect to on 16th December, 1999.

It is on the aforementioned premise the effect of the impugned judgment may have to be considered.

8. The Division Bench by its impugned judgment framed the following question:-

"Was the petitioner-respondent sitting on the fence and sought to obtain success on the basis of success of another?

It was found that he did.

The Division Bench opined :-

"He having not expressed grievance as regard special treatment meted out to Hamiddulah Dar for a long period of time, in law, cannot be permitted to leap forward for the first time, on the basis of success of another who had been pursuing his grievance right from the date when the subject unwarranted favour was shown to