Abdul Basir & Anr vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

Amrita Sinha, J

The Court:- In the order dated 13th December, 2019, it was recorded that the petitioners were engaged as Resource Persons on 30th January, 2008

and were released for attending five days residential training in March, 2013.

The petitioners claim that by a further order dated 13th February, 2015 issued by the Block Mission Director, Anandadhara & Block Development

Officer, Karandighi, Uttar Dinajpur the petitioners were engaged as Enumerator for collection of the SHG Data from the grass-root level in respect of

Domohana Gram Panchayat. Since 2016 they were prevented from performing their work and no remuneration had been paid to them.

The Block Development Officer, Karandighi, Uttar Dinajpur was directed to file a report dealing with the allegations made by the petitioners in the

instant writ petition.

In spite of repeated notices, none appeared on behalf of the Block Development Officer, Karandighi, Uttar Dinajpur.

Accordingly, the Court has to consider the writ petition on the basis of the averments mentioned therein and the documents annexed thereto. It

appears from the annexure of the writ petition that by an order dated 13th February, 2015, the Block Mission Director, Anandadhara & Block

Development Officer, Karandighi, Uttar Dinajpur engaged the petitioners as Enumerator for collection of the SHG Data from the grass-root level in

respect of Domohana Gram Panchayat, which was started in the Block on 10th February, 2015.

There is nothing on record to show that the petitioners actually worked as per the aforesaid work order.

The writ petitioners claim that since 2016 they were prevented from performing their work. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioners

ever approached the authorities for permitting them to continue with their work. Nothing is there to show that the petitioners actually approached the

authorities for payment of the remuneration, which was allegedly due, and payable to them. There is no document to substantiate the claim of the

petitioners that they were prevented from performing their duties. The petitioners waited from 2015 till 2019 to file the writ petition. The requirement

of submitting a letter or representation to rectify the breach allegedly committed by the respondents has also not been adhered to, prior to filing the

writ petition.

It is true that there is no period of limitation fixed for approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in its high prerogative

writ jurisdiction but the Court has to consider each and every case on its own facts and in the event there has been considerable delay in approaching

court then the court has to exercise the discretion whether to entertain the writ petition on the basis of the facts and grounds pleaded therein.

In the instant case, it appears that the petitioners did not take any effort since 2015 onwards for redressal of their grievances. A minimum

representation was also not filed by the petitioners highlighting their grievances before the authorities for redressal. No explanation whatsoever has

been made in the writ petition justifying the delay in approaching court.

In the aforesaid facts, I am not interested to exercise my discretion in entertaining the writ petition. The Writ Court ought not to come in aid of an

indolent litigant, who sat tight over his right for a considerable period of time. The writ petition fails both on the ground of limitation as well as on

merits.

W.P. No.216 of 2019 is dismissed.

Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on compliance of usual legal formalities.