ORDER
Shanker Raju, Member (J)
1. Learned counsel heard.
2. By virtue of the present OA, the applicant, who was working as Registrar (Outlying Benches) and presently on deputation as Registrar to Ravi & Beas Waters Tribunal, Ministry of Water Resources, New Delhi, has sought disposal of his representation dated 20.4.2006 wherein apart from correcting the date of his promotion as Registrar w.e.f. 22.2.2000, which has been shown in the seniority list issued on 17.2.2005 as 22.2.2002, he has claimed by virtue of having been worked on an equivalent post of Joint Registrar, i.e., in the rank of CSO w.e.f. 1.7.1982. Counting of the seniority in the grade in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in SI Rooplal and Ors. v. Lt. Governor through Chief Secretary, Delhi and Ors. wherein it has been held that any rule, which takes of the seniority in the equivalent grade, is void abinitio.
3. Learned counsel would also contend that being apprehensive of an adverse action to the detriment of the applicant, he made his request/representation on 20.4.2006, which has come in the wake of the revised seniority list of Deputy Registrars promulgated year-wise wherein the seniority of the applicant has been relegated.
4. In the above view of the matter, what has been stated is that had his request for reckoning seniority in the equivalent grade would have been disposed of, the above seniority list would have shown the seniority of the applicant much above all the incumbents.
5. Learned counsel would also contend that the applicant is the senior-most Joint Registrar/Registrar and is in the line of being considered for promotion to the post of Principal Registrar and any relegation in the seniority or non-dispensation of his request/representation in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in SI Rooplal’ case (supra) would be prejudicial to the applicant.
6. In this view of the matter, having regard to the observations made, this OA stands disposed of at the admission stage with a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the applicant dated 20.4.2006 by passing a detailed and speaking order in the light of the decision in SI Rooplal’s case (supra) within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. Till then, I am of the considered view that any decision in the matter of finalization of seniority would not be issued to the prejudice of the applicant in undue haste till his request for reckoning the seniority is finally settled by way of disposal of the representation.