9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector illegally, relaxation of prescribed Rules, similar treatment for seven persons, delay/laches in seeking relief, jurisdiction of Division Bench in entertaining Letters Patent Appeal.
Promotion to Sub-Inspector: - Hamiddulah Dar was promoted to the post of Sub-Inspector illegally in 1987 by relaxing the prescribed Rules. - Abdul Rashid Rather, a Constable, filed a writ petition in 1987 seeking similar treatment, which was allowed by the High Court and upheld in subsequent appeals. - Four other individuals filed a writ petition in 1997 for promotion to Sub-Inspector, which was granted by the High Court and later by the Supreme Court. Delay/Laches and Jurisdiction: - Petitioner filed a writ petition in 2000 after the finality of Abdul Rashid Rather's case, questioning the delay/laches in granting him similar relief. - Division Bench questioned if the petitioner sought success based on another's case and opined that delay/laches prevented him from claiming similar relief. - The Division Bench's approach was challenged, questioning the interference by the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. Legal Principles and Discretionary Jurisdiction: - The Court emphasized the need to enforce equality in legality, not illegality, under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. - Various legal precedents highlighted the importance of timely enforcement of claims and the denial of relief based on delay and laches. - The discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution may be denied due to delay/laches, ensuring equity is enforced within a reasonable time frame. Conclusion: - The Division Bench's decision was upheld, considering the petitioner's delay in seeking relief and the potential adverse impact on others' seniority and public funds. - The Court emphasized the need to balance individual grievances with public interest and general administration while granting equitable relief. - The judgment of the Division Bench was deemed neither arbitrary nor illegal, leading to the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition summarily.
|
