IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2010 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1931 WA.No. 294 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.35519/2009 Dated 09/12/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ DHARMARAJAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.GANGADHARAN, KAIPARAMBIL HOUSE, ADATT, PURANATTUKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.P.A.ANITHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, (CENTRAL ZONE), ERNAKULAM. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.294 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 5th March, 2010. J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant/writ petitioner, who was a Police Constable, was dismissed from service as per Ext.P6 order of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, dated 6.12.1994. He appealed. The appeal was dismissed by the Government, by Ext.P8 order dated 28.1.1998. Challenging Exts.P6 and P8, the Writ Petition was filed in December, 2009, after a lapse of 11 years. The learned Single Judge, declined to entertain the Writ Petition on the ground of delay and dismissed the same. Hence, this Writ Appeal. 2. The point to be considered is whether the exercise of discretion by the learned Single Judge in this matter is sustainable or not. We find that no valid reason has been pleaded in the Writ Petition, to ignore the delay of 11 years. The punishment orders cannot be challenged, even in a civil suit, after the lapse of three years. Ordinarily, a Writ Petition has to be filed within three months of the date of the order impugned. In view of the above position, we find that the learned Single Judge has WA NO.294/2010 2 taken a plausible view, on the facts, with which this Court cannot interfere in a Writ Appeal, filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. tgs K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.294 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 5th March, 2010.