AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for condoning the delay in filing this appeal. In view of the reasons stated in the application the delay in filing this appeal is condoned.
Heard learned counsel for the parties on merit of the case.
Admittedly, the petitioner approached this Court by filing writ petition being CWJC No. 1287/1995(R) and that was disposed of and thereafter the petitioner submitted representation for getting salary for which petitioner was again permitted to give some proof and documents by order dated 27.03.1996.
According to the petitioner, the petitioner submitted his representation but his representation has not been considered and he has not been given the arrears of salary. Firstly, in such situation, the writ petition filed in the year 2005 for obtaining any relief under the order of 1996 it was not maintainable in view of the gross delay and laches on the part of the petitioner. Not only this, even in the year 1996 it was pointed out that after 1992, whether the petitioner was driving any vehicle or not, was not known, therefore, he was given permission to produce evidence. Therefore, after delay of more than 13 years the petitioner cannot be allowed to raise the disputed question of facts. However, the learned single Judge has considered other reasons also and found that the petitioner was not entitled for any relief. We do not find any merit in this L.P.A. the same is dismissed.