GAYA PRASAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner is that three writ petitions, WP No.69 of 2019, WP (C) No.70 of 2019 and WP (C) No.71 of 2019 were dismissed for default by an order dated March 18, 2021 when the petitioner had been transferred to Delhi and, in any event, the prevailing lockdown following the second surge of the pandemic prevented the petitioner from prosecuting his petitions.

(2.) The petitioner appears in person. The petitioner relies on an order passed on January 23, 2023 by the Supreme Court on a petition carried to that Court under Article 32 of the Constitution. In essence, the Supreme Court observed that the petitioner's applications for restoration of the three petitions should be considered in right earnest by this Court.

(3.) No court likes a matter to be dismissed without going into the merits thereof. As it is, citizens are reluctant to approach the court because of the notorious fact of the court's delay. Here was a case where a Central government employee had challenged orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal but could not stay back to conduct the case in view of his posting and the lockdown situation.