← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/8848/2017

Y.S. Tanwar And ORS v. Union Of India And ANR

2017-10-09Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi,Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Rekha Palli2 pages

$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 8848/2017 Y.S. TANWAR AND ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr.O.P. Sharma, Petitioner No.3.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondents Through Nemo.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 09.10.2017 The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition to assail the order dated 27th April, 1998 passed in OA No.1300/1997 and the order dated 11th February, 2003 passed in the same Original Application, by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, whereby the said Original Application was dismissed by the Tribunal.

As would be evident, the present writ petition has been filed after fourteen years of the passing of the impugned order. The explanation furnished by Mr.O.P. Sharma, petitioner no.3 who appears in person, is that the respondents had taken a false stand in their counter affidavits earlier filed in response to the Original Application and this position has now been accepted by them in response to queries raised under the Right to Information Act, vide response dated 1st May, 2017. Thus, according to the petitioners,

cause of action has arisen now for filing the writ petition to assail the impugned order.

We cannot accept the submission of the petitioners. If, according to the petitioners, the stand taken by the respondents was false, they were aware of the said position throughout. In any event, it was the contention of the petitioners throughout that the stand taken by the respondents was false. Thus, they did not have to await till the respondents gave an answer to their queries raised under Right to Information Act, to prefer the present writ petition. Pertinently, even the said query was raised only on 17th April, 2017 and not earlier though the same could have been raised soon after enforcement of the Right to Information Act in 2005. There is absolutely no explanation for the inordinate delay in filing the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.

VIPIN SANGHI, J REKHA PALLI, J OCTOBER 09, 2017/aa