16.Even though the learned Senior Counsel has made an attempt to satisfy this Court that the appellants are entitled for appointment to the post of Sub Inspector of Police, in view of the fact that similarly placed persons have got the same benefit, challenging the zonal wise selection, he fairly admitted that the appellants have approached the Court belatedly. According to the appellants, the said delay is only due to inadvertence. But, in our view, the appellants have not approached the Court, immediately after publishing the result during the year 1998 or even after getting information under RTI Act during the year 2008 and they watched the entire proceedings before the Tribunal, High Court and also before the Supreme Court as fence sitters and after coming to know about the results of the litigations in their favour, they approached the Court after lapse of several years. Therefore, we are of the view that the Writ Court has rightly observed that the writ petitioners/ appellants herein are fence sitters and their claims are hit by delay and laches and has rightly dismissed the writ petitions. Hence, this Court is unable to accept the contentions of the appellants and consequently, we confirm the order passed by the learned Single Judge.”
