9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (3) TMI 388X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Order dated 16-3-1984 of the Delhi High Court in C.W.P. No. 827 of 1984 Supreme Court but his petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 27-11-1972 reported as Harish Uppal v. Union of India' and (2) that his petition is highly belated. Whatever may be said about the first ground, the second ground given by the High Court is, in our opinion, perfectly justified. It cannot be saidthat the High Court has exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or illegal manner. A few facts will make it clear. 3. The petitioner was commissioned in the Indian Army (Artillery Regiment) in June 1965. He was in the unit which was sent to Bangladesh in connection with military operations there in December 1971. In respect of certain irregularities com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eady communicated. The petitioner says that it was only thereafter that he received the orders of the Government upon his post-confirmation petition. He then approached the Delhi High Court by way of Writ Petition No. 827 of 1984 which has been dismisseed summarily as stated hereinbefore. 6.On a perusal of the pleadings of the parties before us, we are satisfied that the order rejecting the post- confirmation petition filed by the petitioner were duly communicated to him as affirmed by the Union of India in its counter-affidavit. Not only the Union of India has given the reference number and the date of the letter rejecting the said petition but has also mentioned several facts in support of its averment and also to establish that until ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Government of India on this aspect. Once this is so, it cannot be said that the petitioner is not guilty of laches. 8.The petitioner sought to contend that because of laches on his part, no third party rights have intervened and that by granting relief to the petitioner no other person's rights are going to be affected. He also cited certain decisions to that effect. This plea ignores the fact that the said consideration is only one of the considerations which the court will take into account while determining whether a writ petition suffers from laches. It is not the only consideration. It is a well-settled policy of law that the parties should pursue their rights and remedies promptly and not sleep over their rights. That is the wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not later than the expiration of three months from today. This order may be communicated to the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India. (emphasis added) 10.Yet another submission urged by the petitioner is that where the order impugned is without jurisdiction, the plea of laches ought not to be entertained. He sought to bring certain decisions in support of this contention. The petitioner could not, however, satisfy us as to why the order impugned in the writ petition is without jurisdiction. In this view of the matter, it is not necessary to deal with the decision cited. 11.In the circumstances, we see no substance in this special leave petition which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. 12. No orders o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
