In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CWP No. 17001 of 2006 Date of decision: 27.10.2006 Hans Raj …Petitioner Versus Haryana Vidyut Parasaran Nigam and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI PRESENT: Mr. J.P. Dhull, Advocate, for the petitioner. JUDGMENT M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral) The relief claimed in the instant petition is that the respondents be directed to transfer/allocate the petitioner from Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (Operation Sub Division Pundri) to Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (Operation Division Tohana, Circle Hisar) on the basis of the instructions/letter dated 21.6.2000 (P-1). According to the circular the following incumbents could have exercised their option:- “JE.I Field J.E.I/Test JE/Field JE/Test AFM Foreman SSA Commercial Assistant C.W.P. No. 17001 of 2006 JE/Sub Stn. Assistant Accounts. JE/Civil Lineman Installation Inspector LDC/Cash Assistant Stores Officer Meter Reader and AFM/Const. Cable Jointer.” The petitioner has been working as Meter Reader and is covered by the aforementioned categories, was required to exercise option by making representation by 13.7.2000. It is admitted position that the petitioner has exercised option on 11.7.2000 and thereafter the petitioner has been content by making repeated representations and issuing reminders. It is well settled that direction by this Court could be issued only if the petitioner approached on the expiry of six months of making representation, as has been held by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of S.S. Rathore v. State of M.P., AIR 1990 SC 10. For the aforementioned relief if the limitation period of three years as applicable to the filing of the suit is applied then the writ petition would not be maintainable. The period of limitation as provided for filing of civil suit can easily be imported for filing of writ petition as has been held by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in State of M.P. v. Bhailal Bhai, AIR 1964 SC 1006. Therefore, the writ petition suffers from delay and laches and accordingly the same is dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) 2 C.W.P. No. 17001 of 2006 JUDGE (M.M.S. BEDI) October 27, 2006 JUDGE Pkapoor 3