Back
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Hare Ram Rai – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 10.12.2024, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the “learned CAT”) in OA/050/00266/2021 whereby and whereunder the case of the petitioners has been dismissed on the ground of delay of about 11 years in approaching the learned CAT.
2. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that they are licensed porters having valid badge number, working at different railways stations under the Sonepur Division of East Central Railway. In accordance with the decision of Railway Board issued vide letters dated 01.04.2008 and 10.04.2008, the licensed porters/coolies were required to be screened for absorption/ regularization in Group-D post of Gangman, whereafter the screening test of eligible candidates, who had applied in prescribed format dated 23.04.2008, was conducted on 01.05.2008 and then a list of selected candidates was prepared. However, the petitioners were finally not appointed/absorbed/regularized in Group-D post with the respondent-railways.
3. The respondents had filed a written statement before the learned CAT wherein the issue of limi
Delay in approaching the court can bar relief even in matters of rightful claims, emphasizing that negligence in pursuing claims leads to their dismissal.
Inordinate delay in filing a writ petition without satisfactory explanation can lead to dismissal, even in cases involving fundamental rights.
Inordinate unexplained delay of 20 years bars condonation; doctrine of laches prevents revival of stale claims.
Delay and laches are critical in writ proceedings, and a significant delay without reasonable explanation can lead to dismissal of the petition.
Prolonged delay in asserting rights can result in denial of judicial relief, emphasizing the need for prompt action to maintain claims.
A litigant who delays asserting their rights for an extended period may be barred from relief, as delay defeats equity.
The court ruled that delay must be satisfactorily explained for condonation; significant delay adversely affects the applicant's ability to seek equitable relief.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
