IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.914 of 2019 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 29.05.2019 [ENTITY] Appellant versus [ENTITY] and another Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY], CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY], JUDGE Present: Shri [ENTITY], Advocate for the appellant
[ENTITY], CHIEF JUSTICE: (Oral) Delay of 184 days in filing the appeal is condoned for the reasons stated in [CASE NUMBER] the same stands disposed of.
LPA-914-2019:
This intra-Court appeal under clause-X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.07.2018 passed by learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein on the ground of delay and laches.
Admittedly, the appellant herein approached this court by filing a writ petition in the year 2018 claiming promotion to the post of Sub-Divisional Officer with retrospective effect from December 23, 2005, when, he alleges, persons junior to him had been promoted. He retired from service on 30.04.2012 and, after five years of his 1 of 3 LPA-914-2019 - 2 -
superannuation, for the first time made a representation on 16.08.2017 staking his claim before the authorities and when no decision was taken filed the writ petition.
The learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches. We do not find any infirmity in the judgment of the learned single Judge which may require any interference in this intra-Court appeal. The learned single Judge, while non-suiting the appellant, has placed reliance upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of [PRECEDENT], [PRECEDENT], [PRECEDENT] and [PRECEDENT].
The Hon'ble Apex Court, in the aforesaid cases, has held that unless a litigant approaches the Court expeditiously for the relief, the courts should refuse to exercise their extra-ordinary powers under [SECTION] of the [ACT]. In the case of [PRECEDENT] (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court, while considering an identical situation as the one in the case at hands, has observed that a person aggrieved by an order of promoting a junior over his head should approach the court at least within six months or at the most a year of such promotion and no relief is liable to be granted to such litigants who stand by and allow things to happen and then approach the Court to put forward stale claims and try to unsettle the settled matters.
2 of 3 LPA-914-2019 - 3 -
In view of the above, since no infirmity is reflected from the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge, there is no scope for interference.
The appeal is devoid of any merits and, accordingly, stands dismissed.
([ENTITY]) CHIEF JUSTICE ([ENTITY]) JUDGE 29.05.2019 parkash NOTE:
Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO 3 of 3