Allahabad High Court
Brijesh Kumar Ojha vs Commissioner Consolidation And ... on 4 May, 2022
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1588 of 2022 Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Ojha Respondent :- Commissioner Consolidation And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Anil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State-respondents.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to direct the respondents to provide the retiral benefits with an interest.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is adopted son of Deenanath Ojha, who was working as peon in the office of Settlement Officer Consolidation, District Budaun. After the death of Deenanath Ojha on 29.08.1997, who was unmarried, the petitioner being adopted son of the deceased employee, approach the competent authority for payment of retiral benefits but no attention has been paid till date. The adoption deed dated 22.12.1987, which is a notarized affidavit has been annexed as Annexure no.3 to the writ petition.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that the adoption deed is not a proper one, therefore, the relief as prayed cannot be granted. Even otherwise, the present writ petition is hopelessly barred by limitation, as pursuant to the death of deceased employee on 29.08.1997, the petitioner has slept over his rights for more than 25 years and there is no whisper about the delay in filing the present writ petition, therefore, the petition cannot be entertained at such a belated stage. In support of his contention, he relied upon the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Central Coalfields Limited through its Chairman and Managing Director & Ors. Vs. Smt. Parden Oraon reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 299, N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy, reported in (1998) 7 SCC 133, Northern Indian Glass Industries Vs. Jaswant Singh & ors., reported in AIR 2003 SC 234 and in the case of Printers (Mysore) Ltd. Vs. M.A. Rasheed & Anr. reported in (2004) 4 SCC 460, the Apex Court has held that the High Court should dismiss the writ petition on the ground of unexplained inordinate delay.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds no good ground to entertain the present writ petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed on the ground of inordinate delay.
Order Date :- 4.5.2022 Jitendra/-