WP/20750/2002 of B.PENTAIAH NIZAMABAD Vs THE A.P.S.R.T.C., ITS DEPOT MANAGER, NIZAMABAD on 31 December 2021

ORDER

ThisWritPetitionhasbeenfiledbythepetitionerunderAfticle226 of [the constitution ][of ][India ][seeking ][of ][a ][writ ][of ][certiorari ][to]No.T2i 104(8I )i [86-KMR,]quash the [imPLrgned ][Proceeding]dt.06.0I [. 1 ][987 ][as ][arbirrary, unjust ][and ][in ][violation ][o1' ][Arricles ][14' ][I6]and 2 I of [the Const:itution ][of ][India']

2. Brief facts of [the ][case ][are ][that ][the ][petitioner ][joined ][the]respondent organisation [as ][a Conductor ][in ][the ][year ][1980 and ][in ][the]year 1986, while he was conducting [bus ][service ][lrom ][Yerrapadu ][to]Kamareddy, a check [was ][exercised ][and certain ][cash ][and ][ticket]irregularities were noticed. [Accordingly, ][a charge ][sheet ][was ][issr-red ][to]the petitioner and after due [enquiry, the impugned order ][of ][stoppage]of one annual increment, which [next ][falls ][due, ][for ][a ][period ][of ][two]years with cumulative effect, was passed. The [petitioner ][has]challenged this order by way of [the ][present ][Writ ][Petition which ][is]filed in the year 2002.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri V. Narasimha [Goud,]submitted that withholding o1- increment with cumulative [effect ][was ][a]major . pLifiishment -.4and irnposition ol a rnajor penalty without [proper']enquiry is not legal. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance upon a decision of this Court in tfie case of p.V.Narayana and oflrersVs. A.P. State Road Transport Corporation rep., by its ManagingDirector and othersrand a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Courl inthe case of Kulwant Singh Gill Vs. State of [Punjab2and also ][a]decision of a Division [Bench ][of ][this ][Court ][in ][W.A.No.606 ][of ][2009]dt.12.01.2011.Director and othersrand a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Courl inthe case of Kulwant Singh Gill Vs. State of [Punjab2and also ][a]decision of a Division [Bench ][of ][this ][Court ][in ][W.A.No.606 ][of ][2009]dt.12.01.2011.

4, Learned counsel [for ][the ][respondent, ][Sri ][N' ][Praveen ][Reddy' ][on]the other hand [subrnitted ][that this ][Writ ][Petition ][has ][been ][filed ][after ][a]lapse of 15 [years ][lrom ][the ][date ][of ][the impugned order ][and therefore']the writ [Petition is ][not ][rrraintainable. ][ln ][suppofi ][of ][his ][contention' ][he]reliar-rce [upoll ][the ][latest decision ][of ][a ][Division ][Bench ][of ][this]placed Court in [W.A.Nos.i660 ][of ][2018 and 593 ][of ][2016 ][dr'13'12'2021']wherein after [considering the decision ][of ][the ][Hon'ble ][supreme ][court]in the [case ][of ][Kulwant ][Singh ][GiIl ][Vs' ][State ][of ][Punjab ][(2 ][supra)' ][the]Hon'ble [Division ][Bench ][held that the ][deiay ][of ][5 ][to l8 ][years ][is]inordinate [delay ][in ][pret-erring a ][Writ ][Petition ][under ][Article ][226 ][of ][the]Constitution [and ][therefore, ][the ][Writ ][Petition ][is ][not entertainable']

5. The leamed [counsel ][for ][the ][petitioner ][submitted ][that ][the]petitioner [was pursuing the matter ][with Ylabour ][union ][and therefore]after [the labour ][union ][has ][reporled ][their failure' ][the ][petitioner ][has]only filed this [Writ ][Petition' He ][drew ][the ][attention ][of ][this ][Court ][to ][the]averlnents [in ][the ][writ ][affidavit ][to this effect']

, ZOt3 (l) rrL.-r 7ll (l'.8.)I 1991 supp(l) sCC 504I 1991 supp(l) sCC 504

considered [the ][rival ][contentions ][and ][the ][material ][on]6, Having record, this Court [finds ][that ][though ][the petitioner ][has ][stated ][that ][he]a [labour ][union ][for ][redressal ][of ][his ][grievance ][and ][the]had approached labour union has [returned the ][papers ][to him ][only ][in ][2002, no evidence]to this effect has been filed [before ][this ][Cour1. ][Therefore, ][it ][appears ][to]be an after-thought to [get ]over the [period ][of ][delay ][of ][nearly ][15 years]in filing of this Writ Petition challenging [the ][punishment order.]1. A Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in W.A.Nos.1660 of2018 and 593 of 2016, dr.13.12.2021, has considered similar issue andhas held as under:

"I'he undisputed .facts reveal that a u,rit pelition waspreferred by the respondent/workman being aggrieved by orderdated 03.02.1990 confirmed in review by order dated 16.09.1992by which a punishment of stoppage of annual increment for aperiod of two years with cumulative efect was in/lected upon theemployee. The learned Single Judge has allowed lhe writ petitionkeeping in view the judgment delivered in the case oJ KulwtnlSingh Gitl vs. State of Punjab3 .

Learned counsel appearing ./br the appellant/Corporationhas argued before this Court that the employee in rluestion hasapproached this Court after a lapse I l99l Supp (l) SCC 501 2 of17 years from the date of order oJ punishment and therefure in thelight ctf the judgment delivered by the Full Bench rf this Court inthe case of P.V. Naray,ana vs. APSRTC, Hyderabad and others2,the order passed by the learned Single Judge deserves to be setaside.

This Court has carefully gone through the judgmentdelivered by the f'ull Bcnch. Be/ire the l;ull Bench. the employees I 199 r Supp (l) sCC 504

came up he lire this Court hai n t h e cu.s e rl/. K u lu.ant, ;:r' :' r0,,::r' ::'':::::: i n t h e cu.s e rl/. K u lu.ant, ;:r' :' r0,,::r' ::'':::::: paragraphs 7l to 77 has held as undey; :", :;-:

Arguments

',71. On rhe basis o/the dec,firo;1,"rri,,int I o. a buve. t.h e re tel, thc a,, 1",i, irsue oJt t,,i de,u) ijli,rl,r;l una tach?s r;, may be ff "ir,tr::*::,summarized rl, aggrieved (onstiturion Couns Though no b exercise rhould pertod of traio"!.11'fil app:r o1 ;htlintitarion to Jile is a "a"' prescribed writ petition' a"oi fnr zziZii:i"a th" oir*nn_,_;,t,opp,ep,io1")i,ii":;:,'!:r::'i::!ll!.,,^.!^.,*.,!t,,."has properly been ext t o t h e d v i t h c o Re n q(tuy t r c and lhe a t o n s c sampo u r t^ [*'' ;; ][;;i ][; ]r* di ,, r' scret 1 [u ]", [i, ]i,,n ". e tnr u ";2" i i r ht "'.,l [d'; ]C,,ur [: ]r" i r "" r, l Ij,,,5,, ;;;,r;' i l ",,,-,:;":;:::,t,;:;lo, Li ["!, ]!!:,: : o:," t,opp,ep,io1")i,ii":;:,'!:r::'i::!ll!.,,^.!^.,*.,!t,,."has properly been ext t o t h e d v i t h c o Re n q(tuy t r c and lhe a t o n s c sampo u r t^ [*'' ;; ][;;i ][; ]r* di ,, r' scret 1 [u ]", [i, ]i,,n ". e tnr u ";2" i i r ht "'.,l [d'; ]C,,ur [: ]r" i r "" r, l Ij,,,5,, ;;;,r;' i l ",,,-,:;":;:::,t,;:;lo, Li ["!, ]!!:,: : o:," persont cxtraordinary who do not rowers approach uhclcr,c, it " I ii,l,.,ir, i"r.ri.,,,. , ),1)j",,jll,irii",{,and who.stand by ani allow ,h,rgr";; i, "rr"ai ;;;;;,ir,;;;;i;i:i"t c, a fo rw a r i s t a t e and who.stand by ani allow ,h,rgr";; i, "rr"ai ;;;;;,ir,;;;;i;i:i"t c, a fo rw a r i s t a t e y:;i ; : ! : :it ";: l, " [[i;; ][;;; ][;',' ][;]"P "P Q) Caurts have evolved ruto" -f. . sel[_tnpo.red t.estr0tnt.\ ar.tL'uer.t .h [hlrc ]th! High C,t1111 nay hot cnq irL, inru bclatcdur stale (.lain tnd dcny ,alpf 16 , p"i,y ,f n" ir-i,))Suuty [ol tachp! ][()ne ]\rha t\ tardv. n,,t vigtlant an) d,,etnot seek intet-yehtion of the Court *i*i timc frou th-e datc o/ a,c"tul ofcause of olin, o "n^orob-|"o, ott,]g")vrotauan oJ th. constttutioaal. legal or other right. is notentitled to reliefunder /lrticle 226.tL'uer.t .h [hlrc ]th! High C,t1111 nay hot cnq irL, inru bclatcdur stale (.lain tnd dcny ,alpf 16 , p"i,y ,f n" ir-i,))Suuty [ol tachp! ][()ne ]\rha t\ tardv. n,,t vigtlant an) d,,etnot seek intet-yehtion of the Court *i*i timc frou th-e datc o/ a,c"tul ofcause of olin, o "n^orob-|"o, ott,]g")vrotauan oJ th. constttutioaal. legal or other right. is notentitled to reliefunder /lrticle 226

G1 I'io hard and last rule con he laicJ down fttr uniyer.sal,tpplt,attctn and evcl ca.,t ,holl hove to be clcctdecl on itsotr n .f act.r.,tpplt,attctn and evcl ca.,t ,holl hove to be clcctdecl on itsotr n .f act.r.

(1) There is no inviolable rule ol low that whencyer there isa delay, the Court must necessdily refuse b 2 2Al3 SCCOnline /4P 729 3 entertoin lhe petition; it is a rule ofpractice based on sound and proper exercise ofdiscrelion, and each case must be dealt with on hs owia delay, the Court must necessdily refuse b 2 2Al3 SCCOnline /4P 729 3 entertoin lhe petition; it is a rule ofpractice based on sound and proper exercise ofdiscrelion, and each case must be dealt with on hs owi/octs.

(5) There is no lower limit or upper limit and it will alldepend on whqt the breach of the fundanental right andthe remedy claimerl are and how the delay arose.depend on whqt the breach of the fundanental right andthe remedy claimerl are and how the delay arose.

(6) The principle on which the Court refuses relief on theground of laches or delal; is thdt the ights accrued toothers by the delay in /iling the petition should not bedisturbed, unle$ there is a reasonoble explanation for thedeloy, because Court should not harm innocent parties iftheir ights had emerged by the detay on the part of thepetitioher.t.ground of laches or delal; is thdt the ights accrued toothers by the delay in /iling the petition should not bedisturbed, unle$ there is a reasonoble explanation for thedeloy, because Court should not harm innocent parties iftheir ights had emerged by the detay on the part of thepetitioher.t.

(7) Where Lherc is reniss or negligence on the part ofa parryopproaching the Court.for relief after an inordinate andunexplained delay, ln such cases, it \.l)ould not be properto enforce the fundamental right. As a general rule ifthere has been unreasonable delay the Court ought notordinarily ta lend its oid ta a parry in exercise of theexlraordinary pa\rer q[ nandamus.opproaching the Court.for relief after an inordinate andunexplained delay, ln such cases, it \.l)ould not be properto enforce the fundamental right. As a general rule ifthere has been unreasonable delay the Court ought notordinarily ta lend its oid ta a parry in exercise of theexlraordinary pa\rer q[ nandamus.

(E1 l'here i.\ t1o 1.toi'et. o[ fundanental right. But whileetercising ditcretionary jurisdiction Court can take intoetercising ditcretionary jurisdiction Court can take into occount [delay ][ond ][laches ][on ][the ][part ][of ][thv ][applicant ][in]aPProuching [d ][wr ][Courl]

t9) Though [the ][High Courr ][in ][ar?rcise ][ctJ ][the ][powcr ][undet]t-'i't' ) )(' ih it\ disctelton [gr'tnl ][reli4 ][in cqs|l ][whetc l'hr]t-'i't' ) )(' ih it\ disctelton [gr'tnl ][reli4 ][in cqs|l ][whetc l'hr]|i)r*,7''' ,':-L /-^',tt ':igh'' t,, meer [u'n ]tht [\)ioldrcd' ]ehds [oJ ][but ]iuslice [in ][such -qses ][shLlll ][reluse ][utsu.][l']'*1r.,t"",,t ")^")'lu^ nn'' i'g' heen prero4ative puilry o[ loche: iwisdicton rtnd whcre [in ]Jttvout thcrc [oJ ][ar'e][a]i,i ;7, : :,i,' [:,i ][: ][;7: ][; ][i'i''i ][i' ]"i' n'' n [i ][n ][d ][i' ][a ][rc ][r ][h ][t t'z ][t ]"' u u [t ]dexercise [lhe ][discrctionary],':-L /-^',tt ':igh'' t,, meer [u'n ]tht [\)ioldrcd' ]ehds [oJ ][but ]iuslice [in ][such -qses ][shLlll ][reluse ][utsu.][l']'*1r.,t"",,t ")^")'lu^ nn'' i'g' heen prero4ative puilry o[ loche: iwisdicton rtnd whcre [in ]Jttvout thcrc [oJ ][ar'e][a]i,i ;7, : :,i,' [:,i ][: ][;7: ][; ][i'i''i ][i' ]"i' n'' n [i ][n ][d ][i' ][a ][rc ][r ][h ][t t'z ][t ]"' u u [t ]dexercise [lhe ][discrctionary]be [inqppropriate ][n ]iurisdictioniurisdiction t lAt Th? mdttmttn' [p?rttd ][ltrL(l ][by ][the ][Legislatt"e ]['t'' ][tht ][ltnte]""' ,,t,"r t, L [tuit ],n,t,t,it [t ][,n'! ][ttttt., ][b(.]":';;i;;h;,":;,i,. 'ir'.r)rnii ,rrrr ,,,-d'"'ii.v ruk"' tu bc a reLlsrtnablc 'stand(lrdir'.i,rn irtr: [ih ][seeking ][rcned)' ][trntler ][Article ][226 ][cutt]be measured""' ,,t,"r t, L [tuit ],n,t,t,it [t ][,n'! ][ttttt., ][b(.]":';;i;;h;,":;,i,. 'ir'.r)rnii ,rrrr ,,,-d'"'ii.v ruk"' tu bc a reLlsrtnablc 'stand(lrdir'.i,rn irtr: [ih ][seeking ][rcned)' ][trntler ][Article ][226 ][cutt]be measured

' ' (l l) 'riiia i"ni, lf a person ha thereby entitled gives [to ][a ][rehef ]tise tn [chooses ]o reasonable [to ][renuin ]beliel [silent ]in [lbr]theu7 o,n"ri,ii, [he ][is nat interetted ][in ][cllining ][that]u7 o,n"ri,ii, [he ][is nat interetted ][in ][cllining ][that]relief. toutts [hare ][applied ][the ][rule ][of delay with gteater]rigclr in seNice [fiatlers]rigclr in seNice [fiatlers]

(12) The bene/it of a iudgttent [cannol be ][extended ][lo ][Q ][case]automa ;ally. ih" [Cou't ][is ][entitled ][to ][take ][into]considerQtion [the ]fact [as ][to ][whether the ][petitionet ][had]chosen to sit ovir [the ][motter ][qnd ][b'ake ][uP ofter ][lhe]decision of [the ][Court ][if it ][is ]found [that ][the ][petitionet]approachetl the Court [nith ][unreasonable ][delay, ][the same]uay disentille [him ][to ][obtain ][a ][discretionary ][telief ][Long]deiay disentlles a [parly ][to the discretianary relieJ ][under]Articles 32 and [226 ][and ][persons who ][had ][slept ][over ][lheir]rights for long 4 and [elecled ][to ][wake ][trp ][when they had]tie impetus /ron [the jrtdgment ][oJ ][sinilarly ][placed]persons.automa ;ally. ih" [Cou't ][is ][entitled ][to ][take ][into]considerQtion [the ]fact [as ][to ][whether the ][petitionet ][had]chosen to sit ovir [the ][motter ][qnd ][b'ake ][uP ofter ][lhe]decision of [the ][Court ][if it ][is ]found [that ][the ][petitionet]approachetl the Court [nith ][unreasonable ][delay, ][the same]uay disentille [him ][to ][obtain ][a ][discretionary ][telief ][Long]deiay disentlles a [parly ][to the discretianary relieJ ][under]Articles 32 and [226 ][and ][persons who ][had ][slept ][over ][lheir]rights for long 4 and [elecled ][to ][wake ][trp ][when they had]tie impetus /ron [the jrtdgment ][oJ ][sinilarly ][placed]persons.

( t3)Ll/here tluring the inter|ening [period rights ][o./ ][third]p(trties have crystallized, it [would ]be [inecTuitable ][to]disturb those rights at the [instance ][of ][a ][petson ][who ][has]approached the Court [after long ][lapse ][oJ ][tinte and ][where]there is no cagent explanation for [the delay]p(trties have crystallized, it [would ]be [inecTuitable ][to]disturb those rights at the [instance ][of ][a ][petson ][who ][has]approached the Court [after long ][lapse ][oJ ][tinte and ][where]there is no cagent explanation for [the delay]

(t1)llhere the appellcte outhot'ily acting [\rithin ][its]jurisdictron condoned the delay aftet being satisJied withjurisdictron condoned the delay aftet being satisJied with' the exercise facts of stated its powers it1 rclation under [thereta, the ]Article 226 [High Court ]ar 227 of the[in]Constitution should not ordinarily iltedere [wilh ][the]Constitution should not ordinarily iltedere [wilh ][the]

72. An afialysis of the case law [discussed ][above ][wouLd]anply moke it clear thot isslte oJ a [wl"it ][af ]a [anclLlilus ][or Lertiotttrt]is largely a matlet of soLtnLl [tliscrelittrt ][ttncl ][will ][noL he ][gtonted ][if]there is negligenca or omisjian [on lhc ][part ][of ][the ][perton to ][asserl]his right as, taken in conjLtnctian [v,ith ][the lapse ][tt/ ][tinte ][ancl ][other]circumstqnces, couses [preiudice ]ta the [qdverse ]Pafiy. [Thereforc,]burden lies on the work an \^)ha has [to ]establish [that ][inspiteof ][his]best elforts and diligence [he ][v,us ][prevented ]fron [upproaching ][the]authoriry wihin the period oJ limitatian [provided ]for [or ][the ][)Nrit]Court within a reasonable [period ]of [time. ][If ][the ][worknan ][is ][fiot ][able]to satisfactorily explain with cogent reqsons for [the delay he is not]entitled to seek for condonation oJ the delay. lt [is ][true that ][the]punishment imposed cqnnat be sustained in low because of theillegality clept in it in not conducting a [prior ]enquil. [But, still ][the]workman is under [q ]slotutory obligation to challenge the samewithin thertimc provided by the stotutory rules or regulalons orwithiry* feasonable period aJ tin. belore the rrrtt Co rt. if delay ot i t,.t. lS ltars is cr,ndoned, for noa.u yt t,u r t1v r tu p r. c e artdL. t ScttiDg t asitle o[ such orLler " [a,, ][g ][* ][t,,, ][o ],[i:,iX' ][ii,,i,i, ][!:'l ][i,:; ]{ : [:", ]: ;!, ::,(u/s. : : :" t'upta) t'trp : : :,, ;, ;,, i ;, 1' thL to,knon ;; ;" i",', f io r', vek1or,.;r;,:;;;r,','ri;;;":;,il: ;ff ; ;:r; "tri, i: E:: i,,"r,oJ prahottnD os nell, in \hich evltr,.t td ,tdrc,.r;ty h) q1[e',,;;;;: [',':i' ][rhe ].riBhrs [of ][the ][third ][parties]rorJr.ctqdnor .li, gr;ii-1' ,'" ['o'r" ][' toult ][ollhitrs ][4t ][tAmatt ][uha ][te]tut.mttt,d opp,orrnirg [,o ],i,"- ,,,,,,",,r t)rri"",tii,i,'',i.Ii'ltnE ,inf ,',, i':,1,":':'" c,un4"t [a ][statut,ary ]hr ?.ncourLt.q?d [remedl ]or ot'inLtn,- , ",,,, extent i.t ,t,, r,,,,,i,,,,j,)n,i, to be condonetl , )rl""l,' auton^,',i,.',,1,,.'!;, ,1';jYio!,lri,n,i,tl!,j,,,,)';;:.'.:::'.1.'.:.: ";;;;i,;;:;,:,' i i;:.i ;:"'"::r:,;i,i;:'.*1,'',f"":::L() r$ tn e\ercse o[ the it discrelnn, rhc. n hn c.n.t t\ dil.ige rtrtion ond ,,r-,ii," vig aht hut iiiiiii',X7 unable ::;i'"',;f:y::;,: n appt-orfr,in ;'r,ilrii"l)[,"::,:{]end.reaso4s -1r,,:.-./ [,* ][1or ][redressal ][o-f ][his ][grieuance'i, spir) ][r.,:t ][i,;;;;i';i:;,]neglig,ent or beyond slept over his corurol the matter but not a rc o perton wha i, torii ,|aremedies.*riiii[ ii"'"'rir,;;;y,:;;

73. No doubt in the plesent cases the punishment awardedqrnnot be sustained in lqw in view oJ the lav, laid down bv thel:,: ot [r,:-.:,: ]rne Kequtdtta\s 1 ",,,,, i n K bttt_ u t w a a n r _\pe-ttic p, S t 4 sh G i l riad t . as,,,,, hor_ng r,: t*n r i ), prt,,rih,,i i,,', n7 t, ii,inth, Kcgu.l,ttion\ ,f th, 5 r'arp,rutiih a, ,rat,.l tu,i,, th, ,oot,ne?d ta h\,,tdhere.J to. 7he pr,.ti.., nndi, R,,Eulati^n 23 ,,n,p,,uer,tht ofpcllotr authortn.t,, ctuLrtain rn oppril ex7ir.1 o1t,l'c noJ \tttt.t-'t1t ,t' tt ,l .,r lu\itorit-tn courfl,., fu\tJt.J ".,t .11Lt,1i11,ng 1f tt i, tht.,tpfi"1l sari.,nicl "u,r.ttier tltai tn t;n,.. thc appcilait4 .,tntilorpo\ter tno), al_\o be exercised under Regulation 29. l{the oulhatitv i.tnot satisled with the explanation offerecl bv ihe *orknari i,,-htllcnyrtq th, o"der" ot puntshn,,nt, this Court. tn cxercis( ot thcjuti.tdictiotl utldet.Article 226, cannot inlerfere Ltnless the conclusionarrir:ed at hy the authoritv thdt the explanatiotr oJfered b|; tlteworkman is nol jusli/ied or germane or no prudent person t,,ouldltate conte to .\uch a conclusion. ln apprcpriate cases whete theappeal ot reyision is.filed \rithin a reasonable period of deloy, it isalva1,5 11p", /a) lhe appellale or reyisianal authority to corujone thetl.lq ot, talid Lxplanattan put tnrth b rhc uorAman tn notapprooching the duthorities y,ithin the time specified. in whiche\)e)11, the \+ril Court should not inter/bre with the ardet. ln ouropinin. tlten Regulatians prot,ided a period oI tu,o months fitrfilingonoppeal [and ][six ][months./br ]a [revi.\ian, ]delay of 5 16 16r"ortin approdching Lhe aulhariD) ttould cet.t.linl1, hefatal to the case ofattorknan unles.s prope t erplained wilh cogent reasons.

,'4 It it true that tn some cases u,here the del6y is _/ire.years [or ][so the ][Supreme ][Court ][inchned ][to ][condone the delav ][but]under different circumstances when the .fundamentol rights areviolatetl ttr where the deloy is not directly attributable to the porry,seeking the relief or where the righls o/ the third parties are notinlervened or in matlers where seniority of employees is notJinalized, [the ][Court, would ][be ][justtfied ][to ][grant ][the ][relief; ][but not ][as]a general rule of practice. Therefore, in our considered opinion,Kulwant Singh Gill's cqse (supra), does not confet or clothe [qn]aulonalic righl v,)ith the employee to challenge the order of theauthority al any time or wheneyer he wishes. The principles laiddown by the Apex Court governing lhe condonation of delay wilLcertainly and equally hove application even in cases wherechallenge is mdde lo an order imposing the punishmenl contrary lolhe ReErlatians or the ratio in Kulwanl Singh Gill's case (supra),where lhe employee had slept ovet the malter and had nol chosen tochallenge it within o reasonable pe od of tine. It mq, also be'noticed that in senice matters, the Courts have applied the rule ofdelav gredter rigal'1,ith 75' [lle ][therelore' ][agree ][\'tih ][the ][riev/ ][nken ][by the ][Division]sencn [in ][id. ][Esa ]'lti [i ][case ][tsuP'a)]

76 [[We ][ans\^'er ]][[ans\^'er ]][lhe ][reference accordingLy]

76 [[We ][ans\^'er ]][[ans\^'er ]]-- Ai Lttrtod\ nt)t(ct [in ]'ut [( ][..:':il;;: ]"i't!'ti ii"orders [are ][purrr ][J..o,'.'1". ].','o.l::::; rr',';rr' inl ow [ut' ][*r.,trr, ]"',i'petitioners. [tn ][th! ][tisht ]"t ':: :::,::i",':;;; i" h, li,r,^."t [ut ][bv ][th']..tppeal [ancl ][rhe ][respecltte ]Re9istt "'" v".t't'il l')',')I" [[p,op,ior" [Brnrhcs ]. "tr.i',h" ,o,u'" law [beJart ]and [in ][lh!][the],l|iua"""" ",,h apprcpriate [B(nches Jo.r ][dtspasa' ]in' ,iir'1uagl,/nn,l'rghr [[o ]]f [the ]PnnciPles [laid ][down]

[[o ]]The [delay oJ'5 ][to ][16 ][years ][tt'as ][held ][to ][be ][inordinate ][delay]The [delay oJ'5 ][to ][16 ][years ][tt'as ][held ][to ][be ][inordinate ][delay]

The in preferrtng [awrit ][petition ][under ][Article ][226 ][ol ][the ][Constitution ][of]India

In the [considered ][opinion ][of ][this ][Court' on the ][issue ][Qf]and [laches, ][as ][has ][been considered ][by ][the ][Full ][Bench' ][as]delay there [v,as ][certainly ][an ][inordinate ][delay ][of ][l7 ][years ][in ][approaching]this Court, [the order ][passed ][h1' ][the ][learnecl ][SingLe ][Judge is ][hereby]set aside.

Accordingly, [the ][writ ][appeals ][are allowed']

This Bench [in ][some ][of ][the ][cases ][has ][taken ][a contrary'iiew]on the [issue ][of ][delay ][and ][laches' ][but ][the ][Jact ][renains ][lhat ][lhe]juclgment of the Full [Bench ][has ][been ][brought to ][out ][notice ][for ][the]rtrst [time ][torlay ][and ][therefore, the ][ortler ][has ][been ][passed ][in ][the]light of the [judgment ][deliveretl ][by the ][Full ][bench]

sltLtll :ttrncl [t ]losctl [T ][here]\1i.\(ellLtLteou.\ 1;t: [lilitttt. il ][unt']si'tull bc [no ]ttrtlet [us ][trt ][c:osl.l]

8. Respectfully [following ][the ][same ][and ][as ][the ][facts ][and]circumstances [in ][this ][case ][are ][similar, ][this ][Writ ][Petition is ][dismissed]on the [ground ][of inordinate ][delay ][of ][l5 ][years' ][No ][order ][as ][to ][costs']

9Pending miscellaneous [petitions, ][if ][any, ][in ][this ][Writ ][Petition]

shall a lso stand [distnissed.]

IITRUE [GOPY"]

^..B?it{AE.TJ[]i[sEcrlodbfFlcER

I loeuci

HIGH COURT

DATED:31 [11212021]

ORDER

W.P.No.20750 of 2002

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS

1Yl[E ][STA I4.'](Ja)o0 [2 tEB ][2{i2?],