High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Vijay Singh v. Union Of India And Another - WRIT - A No. 33005 of 1994  RD-AH 3340 (21 September 2005)
Court No. 26
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.33005 of 1994
Union of India and another .........................................Respondents
Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan, J.
Heard Sri R. B. Singh, learned counsel of the petitioner and Sri Anup Kumar Srivastava appearing for the respondents.
By this Writ Petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant disability pension to the petitioner. The case of the petitioner in the Writ Petition is that he joined service in the Army on 26.7.1962 and served the department till 19th December, 1965. The petitioner was lastly posted in Base Workshop Unit No. 512, Pune in State of Maharashtra. The counsel appearing for the respondents raised two preliminary objections. First objection to the Writ Petition is that the petitioner has approached this Court with inordinate delay and the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of latches. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner was discharged from Army service on 19.12.1965 and discharge certificate was issued to the petitioner in the year 1965 itself on 21st December, 1965. The learned counsel of the respondents further contended that the petitioner's claim for disability pension was rejected vide the letter dated 15.2.1966 which was communicated to the petitioner on 16.3.1966. The Writ Petition has been filed after twenty eight years of rejection of the claim of disability pension which is highly barred by latches and the Writ Petition should be dismissed on this ground alone. Learned counsel for the respondents has secondly submitted that the petitioner was discharged from Pune in the State of Maharashtra and this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain this Writ Petition. He has also placed reliance on the judgement of the Full Bench Rajendra Kumar Mishra Versus Union of India and others reported in 2005 (1) UPLBEC 108. Learned counsel of the petitioner replying the objection of the counsel for the respondents on the ground of latches, submitted that the petitioner has submitted several representations and had lastly given a notice through his counsel on 28th October, 1993 to the respondents hence the latches has been explained. From the Writ Petition it appears that only document filed to the Writ Petition is the copy of notice dated 28.10.1993 sent through Advocate Annexure III to the Writ Petition. The petitioner having discharged from Army service on 19.12.1965, he ought to have approached the Court for relief regarding claim of disability pension within reasonable time. The fact that the petitioner has submitted several representations and lastly gave a notice on 28th October, 1993 does not explain laltches. The submission of the representations for long period of time can neither extend the period of limitation or can be said to be satisfactory explanation for delay. In the present writ petition there is delay of about twenty eight years in approaching the Court. The apex Court in A.I.R. 1977 S.C. 1979 Naib Subedar Lachhman Dass Versus Union of India & others upheld the order of the High Court dismissing the Writ Petition on the ground of latches when the Writ Petition was filed after four years of the discharge of an army personnel. Twenty eight years delay in approaching the Court in the present case is sufficient for rejecting the claim of the petitioner. The Writ Petition has been filed with inordinate delay and cannot be entertained and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.
In view of the fact that the Writ Petition is being dismissed on the ground of latches it is not necessary to consider the second objection of counsel for the respondents regarding territorial jurisdiction of this Court.
The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of latches..
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.