Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Hawa Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jagmohan Bansal, J.
The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to count his service as T/Mate from April' 1973 to January' 1981 for retiral benefits.
2. The petitioner worked from 13.04.1973 to 28.01.1981 as T/Mate on work charge basis. He was regularized on the post of Assistant Lineman w.e.f. 29.01.1981. He retired from service on 30.06.2010.
3. On the asking of reason of inordinate delay in approaching this Court, Mr. S.K. Hooda, Advocate submits that petitioner is an illiterate person and he was not aware about policies of the respondent. He was not made aware of the policies, thus, could not approach this Court within time.
4. There is no explanation much less reason for inordinate delay in approaching this Court. No hard-and-fast rule can be laid down as to when the High Court should refuse to exercise its jurisdiction in favour of a party who moves it after considerable delay and is otherwise guilty of laches. Discretion must be exercised judiciously and reasonably. In the event that the claim made by the applicant is legally sustainable, delay should be condoned. Where illegality is manife
Point of Law : Doctrine of delay and laches should not be lightly brushed aside. A writ court is required to weigh the explanation offered and the acceptability of the same. The court should bear in ....
Prolonged delay in asserting rights can result in denial of judicial relief, emphasizing the need for prompt action to maintain claims.
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
