WA/44/2026 of TOPI CHANDRA BHOI Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 6 July 2026

ORDER

06.07.2026

03.

1. The instant writ appeal, directed against order dated 23rd September, 2025 passed in WP(C) No.21572 of 2025, is at the behest of the writ petitioner, whose writ petition filed before the Single Bench stood dismissed primarily on the ground of delay and laches in approaching the Court.

2. The right, which originated in the year 1986, is sought to be resurrected by taking recourse to the writ jurisdiction after more than a decade. The age limit for a public employment having crossed, the digression in the relief appears to have been claimed in the form of compensation. It is undisputed that the writ petitioner sat over his right for nearly two decades and for the first time, approached this Court with the writ petition being WP(C) No.27073 of 2019. The said writ petition was disposed of on 13th January, 2020 in an usual manner directing the writ petitioner to approach the authority by making a representation, which cannot be construed to have created a cause of action in relation to a stale claim, which perished by passage of time. Subsequent writ petition, i.e., W.P.(C) No.27606 of 2022, filed in succession, came to be disposed of on 21st November, 2022 with liberty to the writ petitioner to approach competent authority. The Director, Public Health, Odisha vide order dated 7th September, 2023 rejected the compensation claimed to the tune of Rs.4,00,00,000/-. Said order is assailed by filing the writ petition.

3. A valiant attempt is sought to be made taking shelter under the amity and/or comity of judicial discipline and insisting adherence of the earlier precedent in the later situation if the same is delivered by a higher forum or a coordinate Bench. The aforesaid submission appears to have been founded upon the facts that the relief in the form of the engagement and/or service to a similarly circumstanced person by the authority and deprivation to the writ petitioner as he was spared from getting the similar treatment. The right to employment is not an inchoate and/or absolute right. The right to offer the candidature for an employment is a vested right recognized under the Constitution. If any discriminatory treatment is perceived by a similarly circumstanced person, we had no hesitation in our mind that the equality principles applies. The equality is not an abstract principle as its applicability varies and to be applied amongst the equals and not amongst unequal.

4. We have no hesitation to dismiss the relief to a person, who sleeps over his right and suddenly wakes up from a slumber and approaches the forum praying to grant the relief. Though there is no prescribed period of limitation for filing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the frivolous application and the claim, which becomes a deadwood, has not been permitted to be resuscitated if the litigant has approached the Court after a considerable period of time. The principle of delay and laches is applied in this regard and the person, who could not assert his right promptly, should not get such relief after a considerable delay.

5. Since the Single Bench has dismissed the writ petition primarily on the ground of delay and laches noticing that the writ petitioner was not vigilant and dormancy is patent, we do not find any ground warranting interference in the instant writ appeal, which is dismissed. As a result of disposal of the writ appeal, all pending Interlocutory Application (s), shall stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman) Judge MRS/Laxmikant Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 14-Jul-2026 11:53:18 Signature Not Verified