This court dismissed the petitioners writ petition seeking pay fixation from 1986. The court held that the inordinate delay of 40 years barred the remedy, referencing Supreme Court precedent that delay extinguishes right to relief.
Petition dismissed; parties to bear own cost.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 18
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8349 of 2024
Petitioner :- Ramesh Chandra Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Social Welfare , Lko. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinay Misra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Naresh Chandra Mehrotra
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
but definitely bars remedy.
Order Date :- 27.9.2024 Satish
Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can entertain this petition given the inordinate delay of almost 40 years.
Whether the benefit claimed for the year 1986 is barred by the petitioners superannuation in 2023.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Prem Singh and others vs. Birbal and othersExplained¶13
Prem Singh and others vs. Birbal and others, (2006) 5 SCC 353 · Who else cites this
Ramesh Chandra Yadav
State Of U.P.
Prin. Secy. Social Welfare, Lko.
2 Others
Manish Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
