Himachal Pradesh High Court
Decided On: 1St April vs No. 14482366-L Ex. Sep Mohinder Singh on 1 April, 2025
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
2025:HHC:8837
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
CWP No. 4630 of 2025
Decided on: 1st April, 2025
____________________________________________________
Union of India and others ....Petitioners.
Versus
No. 14482366-L Ex. Sep Mohinder Singh ....Respondent.
________________________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge
Whether approved for reporting? 1
For the Petitioners: Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor
General of India with Mr. Rajeev
Sharma, Advocate.
Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (oral)
The present Writ petition is directed against the order
dated 11.02.2019 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal.
2. Initially the case was filed on 09.01.2024 before this
Court almost after a period of four years and eleven months. On
account of certain objections being raised by the Registry, the case
had been returned. Resultantly, miscellaneous application being
CMP No. 5599 of 2025 has been filed for condonation of delay in
re-filing the Writ petition after removing the objections. Keeping in
view the averments made in the application, duly supported by an
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
-2- 2025:HHC:8837
affidavit, the application for condonation of delay being CMP No.
5599 of 2025 is allowed.
3. In our considered opinion, the case is already covered
by the principles laid down in CWP No. 2522 of 2025 titled as
Union of India and others vs. Pawna Devi alongwith connected
matters, decided on 25.02.2025, which reads as under:
"25. It is not the case of Union of India that there is any
fraud or misrepresentation in the present set of cases, whereby
mainly the legal representatives of the Armed Forces are
seeking redressal of their rights. The State or the public body
can be given some acceptable latitude keeping in view the law
laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the principle of
limitation and though no precise formula, as such, can be laid
down, but we cannot brush aside the fact that the parties in
view of the orders passed by the Tribunal could have also
resorted to getting the orders executed by filing appropriate
remedies and Tribunal has also granted the benefit of penal
interest, if the payment is not made within the prescribed
period. Inspite of this fact the Union of India chose to sit tight
and chose not to file the writ petitions within a reasonable
period which can be classified as one year and beyond the
same, no indulgence can be granted.
26. Therefore, the period prior to 18.10.2023 as such
between the date of the decisions ranging from
May/August/November, 2022 cannot be condoned in any
manner and therefore, we are of the considered opinion that
the present writ petitions are liable to be dismissed on the
grounds of delay and laches as on account of Union of India
not having resorted to its legal remedies expeditiously or even
having made reasonable effort to challenge the said orders or
even take a decision as such to challenge the said orders for a
period of over one year. The latitude as such on account of
laxity on the department, in such circumstances cannot be
extended.
27. Without going into the merits of the cases, we are of the
considered opinion that there is a delay of over a year from
passing of the orders and no effort was made to challenge the
-3- 2025:HHC:8837
order passed by the Tribunal within a reasonable time,
therefore, on account of the opinion given on 18.09.2023, the
Union of India cannot raise the issue on merits."
4. Position is worse in this case. Even after passing of the
judgment, the petitioner filed an application for Leave to Appeal
alongwith an application for condonation of delay of 1292 days
which was also dismissed on 10.04.2024. Therefore the present Writ
petition is liable to be dismissed on delay and laches.
5. The present Writ petition has been filed on 9th January,
2024, taking the stock plea which was noticed in Pawna Devi case
(supra) decided on 25.02.2025 and therefore, no case is made out to
entertain the present Writ petition in view of said principles.
The present Writ petition is dismissed and disposed of
alongwith pending application(s), if any.
(Vivek Singh Thakur)
Judge
1st April, 2025 (Ranjan Sharma )
(himani) Judge
