A.R.VILASITHA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by respondent No.1 vide G.O.Ms.No.20, dtd. 2/4/2019, and also challenging the consequential order passed by respondent No.2 vide ORDER ROC.NO.731 & 1525/2016- Vigilance Cell, dtd. 9/4/2019, declaring it to be illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and wholly without jurisdiction.

(2.) Heard Dr. K. Lakshmi Narasimha, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Law & Legislative Affairs appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr. G. Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel representing Ms. Udaya Sri, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

(3.) There is no dispute of the impugned order having been served upon the petitioner promptly. Though the impugned order was served promptly in April, 2019, the instant Writ Petition has been filed on 30/10/2024 i.e. after a gap of more than 5 1/2 years. When the matter was initially taken up for admission and upon the Bench putting up a query so far as the delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching the Writ Court, the petitioner took time to address the same and meanwhile filed an additional affidavit. In the additional affidavit, the petitioner has primarily put the blame for not filing the Writ Petition promptly upon the different Counsels she had approached and consulted; all of whom according to the petitioner did not co-operate in prompt filing of the petition. The additional ground that the petitioner has taken is also that of the financial distress she went into after having lost her employment and the effects of the Covid-19 Pandemic that took place during the period 2020-2022.