DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. MAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition can be disposed of at this stage itself. The impugned order was passed as far as back on 22-1-2003 on an application moved by the petitioner under Section 33 (2) (b) of the industrial Disputes Act seeking approval of its action to remove the respondent from service on the alleged ground of misconduct of the respondent for remaining absent from duty for about 75 days.

(2.) THE petitioner in support of his case has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of DTC v. Sardar Singh, 2004 VIII AD (SC)371: 2004 (6) 613. The petitioner in a very casual manner in para 8 of the petition has tried to explain as to why the said order could not be challenged after lapse of more than three years. Para 8 of the petition is reproduced below:

(3.) THE respondent in the present case has already expired. No sufficient reasons have been disclosed in the petition seeking condonation of delay in filing the present petition as well as no separate application has been filed giving the detailed reasons as to how the petitioner was prevented to file the present petition after such a delay of more than three years.