Honble VYAS, J.–This writ petition has been presented in the Registry of this Court on 22.12.2000. The petitioner has primarily challenged impugned orders Annex.62 dated 4.5.1991 whereby pursuant to a departmental enquiry the Appointing Authority has imposed upon him the penalty of dismissal from service and Annex.64 dated 21.7.1992 whereby the appellate authority maintained the penalty order. On its face, the writ petition suffers from gross delay and, therefore, at the outset this Court called upon the counsel for the petitioner to show sufficient cause why this petition may not be dismissed only on the ground of laches.

(2). The gruelling narration of the facts leadings to delay in filing the writ petition is that on accrual of the cause of action, after dismissal of his appeal by the appellate authority, the petitioner engaged Shri Vinayak M. Joshi, Advocate and handed over him the file alongwith all relevant material. He also made payment of the full fees and expenses. It is deposed of affidavit on affidavit by the petitioner that Shri Vinayak M. Joshi told him that he will require 2-3 months for setting the copies typed and preparing the writ petition and the petitioner was di

Click Here to Read the rest of this document