VINOD KUMAR Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ -petition has been preferred against the order of the Labour Court dated December 18, 2006 upholding the removal of the Petitioner from service by the Respondent vide its order dated August 16, 2001 on the ground that he had remained absent from duty for 72 days without any sanctioned leave.

(2.) THE Petitioner does not dispute that he had remained absent for the aforesaid period without sanctioned leave. His only submission is that despite his having remained absent, the Enquiry Officer had not found him guilty and that the order passed by the Enquiry Officer dated June 26, 2001 was interpolated, in as much as two lines were subsequently added in the order. Those lines read as under:

(3.) APART from what has been noticed above, I find that the writ -petition is liable to be dismissed on delay and laches. The impugned order against the Petitioner was passed on December 18, 2006. It is after five years in the year 2011 that he has challenged the same. There is no explanation as to why the writ -petition has been filed after lapse of such a long time.