INDERJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved against the alleged inaction on the part of respondent authorities, petitioners have approached this Court by way of instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of Mandamus.

(2.) LEARNED senior counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners were entitled to exercise their fresh option in view of notification dated 24.12.1992 (Annexure P -2). He further submits that claim of the petitioners was supported by a Division Bench judgment dated 21.3.1996 passed in CWP No. 18537 of 1995 (Jawahar Lal Verma Master GHS Manwqal Sangrur and others Vs. State of Punjab and others) and also by Annexures P -5 and P -6. He prays for allowing the present writ petition.

(3.) IT is an admitted position on record that cause of action, if any, became available to the petitioners in the year 1986. As per own pleaded case of the petitioners, even if notification Annexure P -2 gave them a fresh cause of action, that was also in the year 1992. Petitioners have miserably failed to give any explanation, whatsoever, as to why they could not approach this Court at an earlier point of time, after issuance of the notification Annexure P -2 by the respondent -State in the year 1992. Having said that, this court feels no hesitation to conclude that present petition has been found to be suffering from delay and laches. No explanation is forthcoming about this inordinate delay right from 1986. The writ petition is misconceived and not maintainable, at this belated stage.