SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Sudhir Kumar Jain, JJ.
Dharmender Rana - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 5502 of 2022
Decided On : 01-04-2022




An unexplained delay of nine years in challenging a dismissal order justifies the dismissal of the petition. Timely action is critical in legal proceedings concerning employment.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Dismissal from service - Petition seeking to set aside dismissal order dated 07.06.2010 on grounds of delay and lack of explanation rejected by the court - Delay of nine years in filing petition without reasonable justification - Petition dismissed. (Paras 3-8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was dismissed from service on 07.06.2010 but did not challenge this dismissal until 25.01.2019, and the subsequent petition was rejected on 18.05.2019 due to unexplained delay.

Findings of Court:
The petitioner failed to adequately explain the considerable delay in challenging the dismissal, which was a critical factor in the court's decision.

Issues: The main issue was whether the delay in challenging the dismissal could be justified and whether the petition should be allowed despite this delay.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that a significant delay in filing the petition without a satisfactory explanation warrants dismissal, underscoring the importance of timely legal recourse in employment matters.

Result: Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT(Oral)

CM APPL. 16380/2022 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application is accordingly disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5502/2022

3. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner seeking appropriate writ/order for setting aside order dated 18.05.2019 rejecting the petition of the petitioner and thereby also setting aside the order of dismissal of the petitioner from service dated 07.06.2010 and directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all benefits.

4. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 07.06.2010. It is also not in dispute that till 25.01.2019, petitioner did not challenge the dismissal order dated 07.06.2010 before any authority.

5. However, he made the petition dated 25.01.2019 first time and the same was rejected by the competent authority vide reasoned and detailed order dated 18.05.2019.

6. The petitioner waited for nine years to challenge the dismissal of order dated 07.06.2010.

7. In present petition, the petitioner did not explain properly delay and latches

8. Accordingly, we hereby dismiss the present petition.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top