MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

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​.

Latest Legal News