Calcutta High Court Acquits Accused Due to ‘Golden Thread’ Principle: Gaps in Medical Evidence and Unexplained Time Frame Prove Decisive Statutory Rules Supersede Old Practices: Kerala High Court Rejects Direct Appointments in Devaswom Board Arbitration Award Challenge Beyond Limitation Period Is Time-Barred: Supreme Court Supreme Court Holds Registration Under Section 8 of MSMED Act Not Mandatory for Referring Disputes to Facilitation Council Post-Qualification Experience Not Mandatory for Teaching Cadre Promotions Under Kerala Medical Education Service Rules: Supreme Court Non-Compliance of Restitution Decree Does Not Bar Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C.: Supreme Court NDPS | Compliance with Section 50 of NDPS Act is mandatory and non-negotiable: Punjab and Haryana High Court Rajasthan High Court: 'Criminal Action Cannot Be Used to Settle Civil Disputes,' Quashes FIR Against Simara Foods Pvt. Ltd." "Criminal Law Cannot Settle Civil Disputes" — Quashes FIR in Family Property Feud: Rajasthan High Court Higher Qualification Presupposes Lower Qualification’ in Tradesman Appointment Case: Kerala High Court Upheld B.Tech degree holder’s appointment as Tradesman Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Custody of Minor Child to Biological Father, Sets Visitation Rights for Maternal Grandparents Employee Earning Above Salary Ceiling and Performing Supervisory Duties Not a ‘Workman’ Under Industrial Disputes Act: AP High Court Use of Modified Trademark 'MAHINDRA ZEO' Does Not Infringe Plaintiff’s 'EZIO': Delhi High Court

Stale Claims Cannot Be Revived After Significant Delay: Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses 14-Year-Old Writ Petition for Promotional Increment Due to Delay

11 October 2024 11:11 AM

By: sayum


Punjab and Haryana High Court in Darshan Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited dismissed a writ petition seeking promotional increments, filed 14 years after the petitioner’s retirement. The court ruled that the petitioner, Darshan Singh, could not agitate a stale issue after such an inordinate delay, reaffirming the legal principle that claims must be raised within a reasonable time to prevent prejudice to the other party.

The petitioner, Darshan Singh, was employed as a Lower Division Clerk with Punjab State Power Corporation and retired in 2010. He filed a petition in 2024, claiming promotional increments that he argued were due after 23 years of service but were never granted. The petitioner claimed discrimination, as other similarly placed employees had received the benefit.

Delay and Laches: The court emphasized that the petitioner had failed to raise his claims in a timely manner, waiting 14 years after retirement to file the petition. The court relied on previous judgments, stating that extraordinary writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked for stale claims, particularly when the delay is unexplained​.

No Continuous Cause of Action: The petitioner argued that the delay should be excused due to the ongoing nature of the financial harm he faced. The court rejected this, noting that the petitioner had not actively pursued his rights during his service or immediately after retirement​.

The High Court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioner’s long delay in raising his claim deprived him of any relief. The court highlighted the principle that those who sleep on their rights cannot expect relief after allowing substantial time to pass​.

This judgment reinforces the importance of timely action in legal matters, particularly when challenging administrative decisions regarding employment benefits. It reaffirms that courts will not entertain claims raised after an unreasonable and unexplained delay.

Date of Decision: October 1, 2024

Darshan Singh v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited​.

Similar News