IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 2240 of 2008(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ GOPALAKRISHNAN.V.,(EX.NO.14232844 K NAIK(TS), S/O N.VELAPPAN NAIR, MELEPLAVARATHALA VEEDU, THAMALAM, POOJAPPURA P.O. NOW RESIDING AT 'GEETHA NIVAS', PURA-50, T.C.17/1780(1), NALLATHU LANE, POOJAPPURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-12. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI SMT.T.V.NEEMA SRI.MANUEL VIVERA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE DEFENCE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CCDA(PENSIONS), ALLAHABAD. 3. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE RECORDS, SIGNALS RECORDS, POST BAG NO.5, JABALPUR. BY ADV.SHRI P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR (ASG) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. --------------------------- W.P.(C)No.2240 OF 2008 -------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Exhibit P2 order passed by the appellate authority, rejecting the petitioner's plea for disability pension. Apparently, the appeal which led to Exhibit P2 order had challenged an earlier order dt.7.8.1998. In my view, there is gross laches and negligence on the part of the petitioner in challenging Exhibit P2 order dt.21.7.2000. The petitioner has no case that Exhibit P2 was not received by him. It is now almost eight years since the cause of action arose. In the circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the dismissal of this writ petition may not stand in the way of the petitioner approaching the authorities, for a reconsideration of Exhibit P2. I do not propose to issue any direction in this behalf. It is upto the petitioner to avail any remedy which he may have in law. V.GIRI, JUDGE. dsn