(1.) The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Upper Division Teacher on 7-3-1968 in the Tribal Welfare Department. According to the petitioner, respondent Nos. 5 and 6, who were appointed as Upper Division Teachers subsequently on 9-12-1968 and 18-12-1969 respectively, got promotion to the post of Lecturers on 21-9-1984. The Gradation List was accordingly published on 15-7-1994 as on 1-4-1994 (Annexure P-1) wherein the date of birth of the petitioner was shown as 8-5-1934 and the actual date of birth of the petitioner is 25-7-1944. The petitioner submitted representation for correction of his date of birth on 16-8-1995 (Annexure P-2). One more representation was sent on 2-11-1995 (Annexure P-3). No decision was taken on the said representations. According to the petitioner, respondent Nos. 5 and 6, who were appointed as Upper Division Teachers subsequently, got promoted on the post of lecturers before the petitioner and they were further promoted on the post of Principal by order dated 28-2-1994 and 16-9-1995 on the basis of the gradation list. The petitioner was promoted ultimately on 31-7-2000 on the post of Principal. The petitioner has filed this petition after a period of six years on 27-6-2006 seeking a relief of direction to the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 for correction of the gradation list and for further grant of promotion to the petitioner from the date when the persons junior to him have been granted promotion with all consequential benefits.
(2.) This petition has been filed after a long inordinate and unexplained delay of six years. The petitioner has not been able to produce or submit any reason for condonation of such a long delay in filing this petition.
(3.) It is well settled that High Court in exercise of its direction does not ordinarily assist the tardy and the indolent or the acquiescent and the lethargic as the belated approach may have the effect of inflicting not only hardship as inconvenience but also injustice on third parties.