ya- IH. TO®HCS'BLIB HISH GCTmT OP JUDICATHRE CHHATTCS3ARH AT BIL&SPOR. Petltitaier B.R. Pofedar, •'CSbief T&Lecom Supwvisor, under the s.o.s. ( AT & a,e), 6\..-y . 0/0 Ttie G.M.T.D. Surg. ^____ _--.-_—.A-,^ Resptmdenta - (1) The Unlcm of todla. I Through the Seca-etary ©fGovt.ef 3nadla, HS i £• & S 1.5.1-. P. ^ !'; New Delhl. r (2) Ihe ca-iairnan, Bharat Sanchar SJLgam, Hew Oalhl. The C.G.M.T. Shopal; H.P. Telecom Q-i.cle, (Sharat Sanchar Nigaai) Bie C.Q.M.T. Raipur; Ghhattlsgarh Teleccn GStrcle (Bharat Sanchar lagan) (5) Ibe G.H.T.D. Burg (Bharat Saiichsir Nigaa) . WIT_PETITIO? BNOEagSECTIOH 226/227 OF 1HE GONSTI1UTI(» OP INDIA. XI-HG-22 SII^T^ K-u^ sn^t ?b<H ^f^T 11111 ^^ 'iiwM<f, wiS\.wis, wwwy W.P* Ete. tITReftShNieft sii^r tRnwHltg 28^QA/2©01.Sd- ? , - ~Mr.: N.E. Sbrivasta^t^lfiarned eouasel for the petitioner. Heard. 1^68 as . ©n19*h ,Nov^ilier^ the Biyi.sI.o.Bal ;EBgl.fle^» Saipur. Tbie .said ordec is fi -."i..i -11-"—'. Shri B.R. Potd^r IXirg was abseat fr<at, ' 6/9/1968 to:15/8/<T9^§ i. i.s;hei*eby tEea^ed otticlal. _is net est.i .a4 coateitaded Consequently it xs-staftecl Igl' petitl.OBer that for the saai^ order ior stopage of one ia^;: January, 1969. It is was not giveQ acy opportQDi^ said iapugned erdeps were A! priaciples of natural justii writ petitioaer is that have teeen aade before •Eae pepresei'itafl.ons toave failen| cpaipetefffe auttiorittesi^he tfaoi|igh eT>i<1Kn^ft'fflMI?l7 "^ ^S^ ^^i: ^7 Slf'tfII 3D^[ jaa order was issaed by i, Raipur Divisioa, .Eollows :- •, Telephojae Operator, duty for ten days fron .'tlie piertod o£ absence ,-@ies Nea". Ttie tled to pay aad allowanee. )-> 1;tie;;learaed .<ouDsel for the cause of aetion anotlier rement was issued on6'th that the petttl.oner' ^y of beiag fieard befsr® ,sued in viQlation o.f the ;e. Ihe contentiois of rbhe several representatloas c^mpeteafc an'tliorj.ty ae' suicdi aa deaf eaT ef -ttoe i|n?it petitiQBQ- is aow the OQ rTT^ ^fo^ an^I.Mach.fyoFytttET) 31I^[^T R-ti=fc svS^f si>41=h VS?^ 3ii^?i ^aTWOiiti tg) the verge of retireseGt, «hi<<In<<litm?fi 'if is^v ifay.K. ^r aif^tR 3n^?f Tfae cause ot actlon arose tn ' 's*-^' .' . 1968. It is 55 yearssiB(;e tben*tbere is .inordinate - . -. . ' ^^' : .' \ ' ^ delay on •tlie part of tbe +Tlt petl.tioner/]^ ^iproacti' i: !' ' .. . '' l.'^-~:. : ^ this Court to exerclse ex1:ra ordiaary jurisdietion under Article22^ o£'the Cossbi-bsbiQn o£India. 'Even assumtag *ha1;i pniacj.^les ®.fnataral tjustice have been violated in passing o£ 53 years in taking pro forua would clearly defea fla.e impugaed ord.er, sucb a delay (seediqg be.fore aa appropriate •j; equlty. Aceording to the learned counsel SWnf&e representa'fcien wasf .iti.Sner since last o^ii 5tfa S^ptant>er» '2000, it eannp-t be said tfiaf fBe writ pstjlttioner has appraoebed this the Gourt very bela-tedly. 'As[ aebionerose in 1968f the I Mave statedabov^caase of |E%<;t;.ttet the writ pettfioner bas aade Eieveral fepregentbattoias would not be ot any asststanee to hla as far approaeiiing ttLtS Coi.iFt^to subnits •bhat, in .fact, ttol by the Sfivepal Impugned c} it wsuld -not be a proper ;RERJ—FS/311—!/2001—50.000, ^istbe l.iiordinate delay JLn aee^gt such.a^veiy very s'tale Learned counsel I|or the petitioaer further |e writ petitiona", is aggrl.ewed pders passed on the dlffwest occasions and tor di^.feT^nt; reasons aBd the iast iaipugned order was lssyediaDecefijbec» 1977. In ny opiatoa, exereise of power tsy ttais Courb; to entertain the claj.as ejftbe wrlt petitioaer af thl.s belatedstage.In tbe re^ul.'t, tbe petitio^i Is di^l.ssed. Sd/- Chief Jusflce