Allahabad High Court
Sri Krishna And 46 Others vs Union Of India And 3 Others on 24 March, 2021
Bench: Manoj Misra, Prakash Padia
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 40
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 363 of 2019
Appellant :- Sri Krishna And 46 Others
Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Vijay Gautam(Senior Adv.),Ambarish Chatterji
Counsel for Respondent :- Rajnish Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Rajnish Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.
This intra-court appeal has been filed against judgment and order dated 28.11.2018 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ-A No. 21526 of 2018 by which the writ petition of the appellants was dismissed on ground of laches.
It appears from the record and from the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties that a recruitment exercise was initiated in the year 2011 result whereof was declared in 2014. A number of candidates were not placed in the final list of selected candidates even though they had secured marks above the cut-off. Some of the candidates filed writ petition and a Single Judge Bench of this Court by judgment and order dated 30.10.2018 passed in Writ-A No. 38585 of 2017 (Mahendra Singh & Ors. Vs. Union of India & 2 Ors. allowed the writ petition by placing reliance upon a judgment of this Court in Ran Vijay and 34 others Vs. Union of India and 6 others (2018) 6 ADJ 369. Upon being aware of such decision of the Court, many other similarly situated candidates filed writ petitions which were disposed off in terms of the earlier order.
The appellants claiming the benefit of parity and by claiming that they had been running from pillar to post for relief, filed Writ-A No. 21526 of 2018 before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment and order dismissed the writ petition on ground of laches by observing that the result was declared in the year 2014 and, therefore, the petition filed after four years of the declaration of result without adequate explanation was liable to be dismissed on the ground of laches.
The learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that similarly situated candidates have been allowed benefit on petitions that were filed as late as in the year 2018 therefore, there was no logical reason not to accord similar benefit to the writ petitioners by condoning the laches.
Upon considertion of the rival submissions, we find that the case of the writ petitioners (appellants) deserves to be examined on merits and not thrown out on laches, particularly when similarly situated petitioners have been entertained by the Court.
The appeal, is therefore, allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 28.11.2018 is set aside.
The writ petition No. 21256 of 2018 is restored to its original number and shall be placed before appropriate Single Judge Bench, if possible, in the week commencing 12.4.2021.
Order Date :- 24.3.2021
CS
