1 1.wp-5569-09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION W.P. NO. 5569 OF 2009 Smt.Sushila Hari Salvi ..Petitioner Vs. Syndicate Bank, Cuffe Parade Br. Mumbai. ..Respondent .... Mr. S.V.Prabhu Adv. for Petitioner Mr. P.K.Rele Sr.Counsel with Mr.V.N.Tayade i/b Piyush Shah Adv.for Respondent-Bank. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JULY 22, 2009 P.C.: 1. Heard both sides. 2. This petition is directed against the award passed against the Petitioner by order dated 19th October, 2004 by the Industrial Tribunal, Pune. The petitioner was an employee with Syndicate Bank. Her services came to be terminated by way of compulsory retirement by the Management by order dated 7th August, 2000. The Industrial Court after giving detailed reasoning, answered the Reference in the negative. The said order, as stated earlier, is dated 19th October, 2004. The petitioner has now 2 1.wp-5569-09 approached this Court after a delay of almost five years. 3. On perusal of the entire writ petition, the only reason for delay is found in paragraph 3 of the petition. According to the petitioner, after the dismissal of the Reference by the Industrial Court, the Syndicate Bank Employees ’ Union informed the petitioner that they would challenge the Award. However, when she found that the Union failed to take any decision in the matter, she has filed the present petition. The said delay is an inordinate delay of five years. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to a want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases, delay of a very long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory. In my opinion in the present case, the delay has not been satisfactorily explained. Hence, in my view, only on the ground of delay and laches, this writ petition is liable to dismissed. Accordingly, it is dismissed. [ SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]