9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 786X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after unreasonable delay, it may have the effect of inflicting not only hardship and inconvenience but also injustice on third parties. It was pointed out that when writ jurisdiction is invoked, unexplained delay coupled with the creation of third-party rights in the meantime is an important factor which also weighs with the High Court in deciding whether or not to exercise such jurisdiction. The Supreme Court in the case of M.P. RAM MOHAN RAJA VERSUS STATE OF TAMIL NADU ORS [ 2007 (4) TMI 714 - SUPREME COURT] has held that So far as the question of delay is concerned, no hard-and-fast rule can be laid down and it will depend on the facts of each case. In the present case, the facts stare at the face of it that on 8-10-1996 an order was passed by the Collector in pursuance of the order passed by the High Court, rejecting the application of the writ petitioner for consideration of the grant of mining lease. The writ petitioner sat tight over the matter and did not challenge the same up to 2003. This on the face of it appears to be very serious. A person who can sit tight for such a long time for no justifiable reason, cannot be given any benefit. Thus, no case is made ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ petition, the petitioner is seeking enforcement of order dated 22.11.1983, i.e., after 39 long years. 5. The submission made by the counsel for the petitioner that all the time, respondent No. 2 was expressing that an appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority, therefore, the gold was not redeemed, cannot be accepted because it is not the case of the petitioner that any appeal was ever filed against the order dated 22.11.1983 by any of the parties. Furthermore, the petitioner was to act vigilantly and there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner had ever tried to find out the details of the appeal or had ever approached the Appellate Authority to find out as to whether any appeal has been filed or not. More than 18 tolas of gold was seized. Thus, it is clear that with passage of time, prices of gold have gone high and it appears that now the petitioner wants to take advantage of 186 grams of gold, which was seized in the year 1981. It is well established principle of law that the delay defeats equity. 6. The Supreme Court in the case of Karnataka Power Corpon. Ltd. Vs. K. Thangappan reported in (2006) 4 SCC 322 has held as under: 6. Delay or lach ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relief can be given to the petitioner who without any reasonable explanation approaches this Court under Article 32 after inordinate delay. It was stated that though Article 32 is itself a guaranteed right, it does not follow from this that it was the intention of the Constitution-makers that this Court should disregard all principles and grant relief in petitions filed after inordinate delay. 9. It was stated in State of M.P. v. Nandlal Jaiswal that the High Court in exercise of its discretion does not ordinarily assist the tardy and the indolent or the acquiescent and the lethargic. If there is inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner and such delay is not satisfactorily explained, the High Court may decline to intervene and grant relief in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. It was stated that this rule is premised on a number of factors. The High Court does not ordinarily permit a belated resort to the extraordinary remedy because it is likely to cause confusion and public inconvenience and bring, in its train new injustices, and if writ jurisdiction is exercised after unreasonable delay, it may have the effect of inflicting not only hardship and inconvenience but ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r because the party has, by his conduct done that which might fairly be regarded as equivalent to a waiver of it, or where by his conduct and neglect he has though perhaps not waiving that remedy, yet put the other party in a situation in which it would not be reasonable to place him if the remedy were afterwards to be asserted, in either of these cases, lapse of time and delay are most material. But in every case, if an argument against relief, which otherwise would be just, if founded upon mere delay, that delay of course not amounting to a bar by any statute of limitation, the validity of that defence must be tried upon principles substantially equitable. Two circumstances always important in such cases are, the length of the delay and the nature of the acts done during the interval which might affect either party and cause a balance of justice or injustice in taking the one course or the other, so far as relates to the remedy. 8. It was stated in State of M.P. v. Nandlal Jaiswal that the High Court in exercise of its discretion does not ordinarily assist the tardy and the indolent or the acquiescent and the lethargic. If there is inordinate delay on the part of the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the other party in a position in which it would not be reasonable to place him if the remedy were afterwards to be asserted. In such cases lapse of time and delay are most material. Upon these considerations rests the doctrine of laches. 6.5. The Supreme Court in the case of Jagdish Lal Vs. State of Haryana reported in (1997) 6 SCC 538 has held as under : 18. That apart, as this Court has repeatedly held, the delay disentitles the party to the discretionary relief under Article 226 or Article 32 of the Constitution. 6.6. The Supreme Court in the case of NDMC Vs. Pan Singh reported in (2007) 9 SCC 278 has held as under : 16. There is another aspect of the matter which cannot be lost sight of. The respondents herein filed a writ petition after 17 years. They did not agitate their grievances for a long time. They, as noticed herein, did not claim parity with the 17 workmen at the earliest possible opportunity. They did not implead themselves as parties even in the reference made by the State before the Industrial Tribunal. It is not their case that after 1982, those employees who were employed or who were recruited after the cut-off date have been granted th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ranchal v. Shiv Charan Singh Bhandari reported in (2013) 12 SCC 179 has held as under : 19. From the aforesaid authorities it is clear as crystal that even if the court or tribunal directs for consideration of representations relating to a stale claim or dead grievance it does not give rise to a fresh cause of action. The dead cause of action cannot rise like a phoenix. Similarly, a mere submission of representation to the competent authority does not arrest time. * * * * 28. Remaining oblivious to the factum of delay and laches and granting relief is contrary to all settled principles and even would not remotely attract the concept of discretion. We may hasten to add that the same may not be applicable in all circumstances where certain categories of fundamental rights are infringed. But, a stale claim of getting promotional benefits definitely should not have been entertained by the Tribunal and accepted by the High Court. 6.8. The Supreme Court in the case of C. Jacob v. Director of Geology and Mining reported in (2008) 10 SCC 115 has held as under : 10. Every representation to the Government for relief, may not be replied on merits. Representations ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice, some of the officers received promotions to higher posts in that service and may even have retired. Those who continued to serve could justifiably think that as there was no challenge to their appointments within the period prescribed for a suit, they could look forward to further promotion and higher terminal benefits on retirement. The High Court therefore erred in rejecting the argument that the writ petition should be dismissed because of the inordinate and unexplained delay even though it was strenuously urged for its consideration on behalf of the Government of India. 6.11. The Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa v. Arun Kumar Patnaik reported in (1976) 3 SCC 579 has held as under : 14. It is unnecessary to deal at length with the State s contention that the writ petitions were filed in the High Court after a long delay and that the writ petitioners are guilty of laches. We have no doubt that Patnaik and Mishra brought to the court a grievance too stale to merit redress. Krishna Moorthy s appointment was gazetted on March 14, 1962 and it is incredible that his service-horoscope was not known to his possible competitors. On November 15, 1968 they we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of future promotions given by applying the rule of reservation to all the persons prior to the date of judgment in Sabharwal case which required to be examined in the light of the law laid in Sabharwal case. Thus earlier promotions cannot be reopened. Only those cases arising after that date would be examined in the light of the law laid down in Sabharwal case and Virpal Chauhan case and equally Ajit Singh case. If the candidate has already been further promoted to the higher echelons of service, his seniority is not open to be reviewed. In A.B.S. Karamchari Sangh case a Bench of two Judges to which two of us, K. Ramaswamy and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ. were members, had reiterated the above view and it was also held that all the prior promotions are not open to judicial review. In Chander Pal v. State of Haryana a Bench of two Judges consisting of S.C. Agrawal and G.T. Nanavati, JJ. considered the effect of Virpal Chauhan, Ajit Singh, Sabharwal and A.B.S. Karamchari Sangh cases and held that the seniority of those respondents who had already retired or had been promoted to higher posts could not be disturbed. The seniority of the petitioner therein and the respondents who were holdi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
