The petitioner sought regularization of services, salary, and seniority as a peon from 1988. The High Court dismissed the petition filed after 17 years as devoid of merits due to unexplained delay, holding it barred by latches.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO : 8320 of 2005
Between:
J.Surender S/o.J.Venkataswamy, R/o.H.No.18-1-337/B/19 Sai Baba Nagar, Near Arundathi Colony, Uppuguda Hyderabad.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 State Bank of Hyderabad,
rep.by its General Manager, (Operations)
Head office, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad,
Regional-I, Zonal office, Hyderabad.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to ; a) To regularize petitioner’s services on the post of "peon" from the year 1988, i.e. from Oct 1988. b) To direct the respondents to pay the petitioner the regular salaries from Oct 1988, based on doctrine of Equal pay for equal work. c) To direct the respondents to grant the petitioner seniority from Oct 1988 on the post or "peon" d) To direct the respondents to grant the petitioner all the service benefits from Oct 1988, i.e, with retrospective effect to grant such other and further reliefs as are just necessary in the circumstances of the case, and direct the respondents to pay exorbitant damages for misusing the powers vested in them, for wasting the petitioners precious period of life, for infringing the petitioners fundamental and legal rights.
Counsel for the Petitioner :Mr.MIRZA NISAR AHMED BAIG
Counsel for the Respondents : .
The Court at the stage of admission made the following :
ORDER:
When the matter is called none appeared in the forenoon as well as in the after noon.
Perused the affidavit. The present writ petition is filed seeking to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner in the post of Peon from 1988 and to pay the regular salary to him from October 1988, and also to direct the respondents to grant him the seniority from 1988 in the said post.
This writ petition has been filed nearly after a lapse of 17 years for the relief sought for by him. But, no material is shown before this Court as to the cause for the delay of 17 years in prosecuting the matter.
Therefore, the writ petition is totally devoid of merits and is dismissed on the ground of latches.
K.C.BHANU, J.
Dated: 15..04..2005.
rns
To
1 The General Manager(Operations), State Bank of Hyderabad,
Head office, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad.
2 The Regional Manager, State Bank of Hyderabad,
Regional-I, Zonal office, Hyderabad.
3 Two CD copies
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition seeking regularization of services filed after a lapse of 17 years without explanation for delay should be allowed.
Whether the writ petition is barred on the ground of laches.
J.Surender
State Bank of Hyderabad
K.C. Bhanu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
