W.A.No.2/2011
10.01.2011
Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant.
Heard on the question of admission.
This intracourt appeal filed under Section 2(1) of M.P.
Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005,
arises from the order of learned Single Judge dated 3.12.2010 by
which the Writ Petition No.17230/2010 preferred by the appellant
has been dismissed.
The facts leading to filing of the instant appeal briefly
stated, are that the appellant who was appointed on 1.1.1990 on
daily wage basis vide order dated 28.7.1992, was terminated by an
oral order dated 7.8.1992. Admittedly, the petitioner did not
challenge the order dated 28.7.1992 terminating her services and
for the first time filed the writ petition, which has been dismissed
by the learned single Judge vide order dated 3.12.2010 on the
ground of laches.
Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended
that the appellant made several representations for her
reinstatement, but it yield no result since the appellant cannot be
held to be guilty of laches.
We do not find any force in the submission for the reason
that admittedly, the appellant was engaged in service purely on
daily wage basis on 1.1.1990 and he was disengaged by an oral
order dated 7.8.1992, which was not challenged before the
appropriate authority immediately thereafter or even within a
reasonable period of time. It further appears from the writ
petition that for the first time, she made representation on
22.6.2004
; a copy whereof is enclosed as Annx.P/2 requesting to
reinstate her after a gap of 12 years. No document has been
brought on record to show that any representation was made
between 7.8.1992 and prior to the first representation dated
22.6.2004 against the order terminating her engagement as daily
wager and the writ petition has been filed in November 2010,
merely after 18 years and, therefore, it cannot be said that the
appellant is not guilty of laches or negligence.
It is well settled legal position that person guilty of laches
and negligence are disentitled to claim relief by invoking the
extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. Reference may be made
to the judgment of the Apex Court in Uttaranchal Forest
Development Corpn. Vs. Jabar Singh [(2007) 2 SCC 112], NDMC
Vs. Pan Singh [2007(9) SCC 78] and Virendra Choudhary Vs.
Bharat Petroleum Corporation and others [2009 (1) SCC 297].
We, therefore, do not find any fault in the order of learned
Single Judge.
The appeal being without merit is dismissed summarily.
(S.R.ALAM) (R.S.JHA)
Chief Justice. Judge.
A.Praj.