Petitioners sought to challenge refusal to cross the efficiency bar. The court dismissed the writ petition due to unexplained delayed filing and laches.
Dismissal of the writ petition for want of explanation for delay and laches.
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.
ASWP726.11.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 726 OF 2011
1. Virendra Singh & Anr. … Petitioners Vs
1. Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents
Dr. Prakash K. Deshmukh for the Petitioner.
Mr. Parag Vyas with Mrs. Anjali Helekar for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI &
B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ.
THURSDAY, 16TH MARCH, 2017
P.C. :
1 The petitioners have not been allowed to cross the efficiency bar admittedly in 1990-1991. That the petitioners have waited till 2011 and to file a petition challenging this refusal, but furnishing no explanation for this enormous delay, we do not think we are obliged to entertain such a belated request.
2 The writ petition is dismissed for want of any reasonable and truthful explanation for the prolonged delay and laches on the part of the petitioner.
B.P. COLABAWALLA, J. S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.
SRP 1/1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain a belated writ petition challenging refusal to cross the efficiency bar without explanation for delay.
Whether prolonged delay and laches justify dismissing a writ petition without condoning the delay.
Virendra Singh
Virendra Singh & Anr.
Union of India
S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
B.P. COLABAWALLA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
