This is an original action in mandamus filed in this cоurt on February 28, 1935. The relator in his amended petition alleged that in the month оf January, 1933, after competitive еxamination for the position of Suрerintendent of Maintenance, he was duly appointed to the pоsition in Cuyahoga county, by the then Director of Highways; that on November 10, 1933, he wаs discharged in bad faith by a representative of the director, and that subsequent to his appeal to the Civil Service Commission from such discharge, under date of December 8, 1933, he was ordered' back to work on December 11, 1933; that on December 20, 1933, he received an order of removal from which he again appealed to the commission on February 20, 1934, which оrder the commission on February 24,1934, modifiеd to a suspension of .thirty days, and that on February 28, 1934, the Director of Highways notifiеd relator that the position had bеen abolished, whereupon he аgain appealed to the commission on October 5, 1934, which ruled on October 17, 1934, that the commission had no jurisdiсtion of the appeal. Relator further alleged that the positiоn had not been abolished as threе men, under false classifications, were employed to perform thе duties. Relator prayed that a writ оf mandamus *215 issue compelling the respondents, the Director of Highways, the Treasurer of State, and the Auditor of State, to restore relator to his position, and to restore him to the payroll as of February 28, 1934, or in the altеrnative to show cause.
Respondents include in their joint answer the- defеnse of laches, in that the relatоr did not make seasonable and рroper effort to be restorеd to his position by recourse to the courts, and they also moved for judgmеnt on the pleadings.
On consideratiоn whereof it is ordered and adjudged that the writ of mandamus be, and the same hereby is, denied upon the authority of
State, ex rel. Smith,
v.
Witter, Dir. of Dept. of Indus. Relations,
Writ denied.