-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed a petition challenging the acceptance of a voluntary resignation by an employee of the Punjab National Bank. The decision, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal, underscored the importance of timeliness in seeking legal redress.
The petitioners, Tara Chand Arora and another, approached the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to set aside an order accepting the resignation of petitioner No. 2, who had claimed medical incapacity due to Schizophrenia. However, the court observed significant discrepancies in the documents presented and noted a considerable delay in the approach to the court.
In his judgment, Justice Bansal emphasized, “Delay does bring in hazard and causes injury to the lis.” This observation formed the cornerstone of the court’s decision, highlighting the principle that inordinate delay in seeking legal remedy can be detrimental to the legitimacy of a claim.
The court also pointed out the lack of substantive evidence supporting the petitioner’s claim of mental illness and coercion by the bank. The petitioner’s resignation, accepted by the bank in 2010, was only challenged six years later, raising questions about the delay.
The judgment referenced several key cases, including ‘Eastern Coalfields Ltd. V. Dugal Kumar’ and ‘Tilokchand Motichand v. H.B. Munshi’, underscoring the principle that delay and laches are critical considerations in exercising the writ jurisdiction under Article 226.
This ruling serves as a significant reminder of the importance of timely legal action and the high standards required for documentation in legal proceedings. The case was represented by Mr. H.C. Arora and Ms. Sunaina for the petitioners, and Mr. Madan Gupta for the respondents.
Date of Decision: 07.11.2023
Tara Chand Arora and Another VS Punjab National Bank and Others
