Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that the first respondent has sponsored 1020 eligible candidates belonging to BC Non- Priority registered upto 30.06.1993 for the vacancies of 51 posts in the ratio of 1:20 and 1089 candidates registered upto 12.07.1995 for the vacancies of 53 posts for OC Non-Priority. The Seniority of the petitioner i.e., 02.08.1995 did not fall within the cut off dates of seniority 30.06.1993 and 12.07.1995 for the categories of BC and OC Non-Priority respectively.

4. Heard Both sides.

5. The age limit for BC is 35, which is not a dispute in both sides. Though the names were sponsored in the year 2007, the writ petition has been filed in the year 2009.There are two years of delay and laches. The seniority of the petitioner is from the date of 02.08.1995. An employment officer sponsoring candidates for the said posts, in which the cut off dates of the seniority are 30.06.1993 and 12.07.1995 for the categories of BC and OC Non-Priority respectively. Since the cut off dates have been fixed for sponsoring candidates for appointment, it cannot be stated by the writ petitioner that 1:20 ratios are not followed. In fact, 1:20 ratio properly followed and the sponsors were only made as per the G.O.6, dated 01.02.2002. Therefore, finding from any angle, now the petitioner is almost more than 46 years, therefore, it will not come under the G.O.6, dated 01.02.2002. There are laches and delay in approaching the Court. Hence, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.