SUSHILA PARGANIHA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An outright frivolous application was filed much after the death of the husband of the present Appellant praying for all kinds of reliefs, details of which have been taken note of in paragraph 1 of the impugned order dated 05.11.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge.

(2.) Looking at the cause of action when it arose, also keeping in mind that the husband of the present Appellant who claims himself to have been appointed as a "Vaidya" under the Respondents sometimes in the year 1963 and then re-appointed on 29.05.1964, had abandoned his services with effect from 08.04.1974, never approached any forum during his life time, the cause is being raised by his wife only now.

(3.) The learned Single Judge, taking the history of the litigation as well as the cause when it arose in relation to such claims had taken a view that such a writ application was not entertainable because a claim which arose 30 years ago could not be allowed to be raised or agitated, that too on half baked facts. Therefore, relying on the principle laid down by the Apex Court, the learned Single Judge had this to say: