IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 28967 of 2010(U)
1. K.B.GOPINATHAN NAIR, S/O.RAMAN NAIR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KOCHI DEVASWAM BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
For Respondent :SRI.N.RAGHURAJ,SC,COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :22/09/2010
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)No.28967 of 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner joined as an employee of Cochin
Devaswam Board with effect from 01.09.1985. According to
the petitioner, the petitioner took leave on medical grounds
and when he wanted to rejoin duty on 01.09.1995 he was
not allowed to rejoin duty. Petitioner claims to have filed
representations and even approached the Adalath which by
Ext.P10 informed the petitioner that in respect of the
subject matter they cannot take a decision and therefore
the files have been retransmitted to the 1st respondent who
would take a decision within 10 days. Petitioner submits
that, despite the same, no decision is taken. The petitioner,
therefore seeks the following reliefs:
“(i) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writ,
order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to
reinstate the petitioner on his employment with effect
from 01-09-1995 with all service benefits;
(ii) Direct the 1st respondent to pay the salary arrears to the
petitioner.”
W.P.(C)No.28967 of 2010
-2-
Admittedly the petitioner lost his job as early as on
01.09.1995. Whether the action of the respondents is
justifiable or not, petitioner did not take any positive steps
to challenge the same appropriately. Petitioner claims to
have filed representations. It is settled law that filing of
repeated representations cannot explain delay and laches.
In this case, the delay and laches is of 15 years. I do not
think that, I can at this distance of time consider the validity
of the action of the respondents in allegedly denying
employment to the petitioner. In the above circumstances,
this writ petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and
laches.
S. SIRI JAGAN
JUDGE
shg/