Delay and laches are fatal in service matters, and unexplained delays in seeking appointment can bar claims, reinforcing the necessity for timely action in judicial proceedings.

JUDGMENT

Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking a direction to the Respondent to appoint the Petitioner to the post of Housekeeper Grade-III in the Lok Sabha Secretariat/Respondent.

2. The narrative of the facts to the extent relevant to the present writ petition is that in 2017, Respondent advertised 27 posts of Housekeeper Grade-III in the pay band of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.1900/-, vide advertisement No. 05/2017 on a direct recruitment basis. Out of 27 posts, 2 posts were reserved for Scheduled Tribe (`ST') candidates.

3. Petitioner being eligible, applied for the post in the ST category and submitted all the relevant documents. After the Screening Test, the result was declared on 17.05.2018. Petitioner scored 32 out of 50 marks. Only one candidate was selected in the ST category at Serial No.131, with a score of 32.33 out of 50 marks. Since Petitioner was at number 2, with 32 marks in ST category, Petitioner was hopeful of getting an appointment letter. However, it later came to light that the unfilled ST vacancy had been initially reserved for a Physically Handicapped Person.

4. Not getting any favourable response from the Respondent, on 07.08.2019, Petitioner wrote to the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (hereinafter referred to as the `Commission') bringing to light the injustice in not being appointed against the ST vacancy and on 18.09.2019, the Commission sought a reply from the Respondent.

5. It is averred that due to the Pandemic COVID-19, Petitioner could not pursue his case further and finally made a representation to the Respondent on 15.03.2021. Simultaneously, the Petitioner also sought information on 16.09.2021 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the `RTI Act') regarding one unfilled vacancy in the ST category. On 12.10.2021, Petitioner received a reply from the Respondent stating that one unfilled vacancy in the ST category was kept for being filled up by a physically handicapped person. Finding no other remedy, Petitioner filed the present writ petition.

6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there is no delay in approaching the Court. The result was declared in May, 2018, which came to the knowledge of the Petitioner much later and he immediately wrote to the Commission for taking action. Thereafter, the Commission sought a response on 18.09.2019 from the Respondent. In between, the matter could not be pursued further by the Petitioner on account of Pandemic COVID-19. On 15.03.2021, a representation was made, followed by an application under the RTI Act, on 16.09.2021. On receiving information under the RTI on 12.10.2021, the Petitioner approached the Respondent several times to issue him an offer of appointment but to no avail. Petitioner belongs to a marginalized section of the society and thus, the delay, if any, in approaching the Court be condoned.

7. Reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the Petitioner on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Tukaram Kana Joshi and Others Through Power-of-Attorney Holder v. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and Others, (2013) 1 SCC 353, more particularly, on paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 thereof to contend that there is no hard and fast rule for condonation of the delay and laches and each case has to be tested on its own facts and circumstances and condoning the delay is really a matter of discretion of the Court.

8. Learned counsel for the Respondent opposes the maintainability of the writ petition on ground of delay and laches and submits that the advertis