Mcd vs Rajkumar And Ors.
2003 Latest Caselaw 1085 Del

JUDGMENT

Mukul Mudgal, J.

1. Rule.

2. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up today for final hearing.

3. This writ petition challenges the Award dated 10th July, 2000. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the award was published on 4th January, 2001 and the information relating thereto was received in the Office of the petitioner Corporation on 14th February, 2001. However, the writ petition was filed in this Court only on 18th February, 2002. There is no other explanation for the delay and laches in filing the writ petition. Mr. Monga has submitted that in matters relating to the movement of files in Government Department, files move at their own pace and such delay in the movement of the official files occur because they are required to go through several channels. Consequently the delay in filing the writ petition is not such which should disentitle the petitioner to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

4. In my view, institutionalized lethargy cannot be any ground to explain the laches of more than one year. Merely because the bureaucratic machinery in MCD moves slowly cannot be a ground for condoning laches.

5. Consequently, there is no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed for laches. I, however, express no opinion on merits in respect of the impugned Award dated 10th July, 2000.