Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harish Dhingra vs Punjab State Power Corporation Limited ... on 18 July, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 P AND H 729
Bench: Krishna Murari, Arun Palli
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No.1302 of 2019 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: 18.07.2019
Harish Dhingra
.....Appellant
versus
Punjab state Power Corporation Limited and another
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI, JUDGE
Present: Shri Robin Singh Hooda, Advocate for the appellant
..
KRISHNA MURARI, CHIEF JUSTICE: (Oral) This intra-Court appeal under clause-X of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.01.2018 passed by the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein challenging the order of dismissal from service on the ground that degree of Master of Commerce, obtained through a distant programme from Eastern Institute for Integrated Learning in Management (EIILM) which is a private university situated in Jorethang, Sikkim on the basis whereof he had applied for the post of Revenue Accountant, was actually not valid and genuine.
Admittedly, the aforesaid university from where the degree of Master of Commerce was obtained was closed. Upon verification by the respondents, the Human Resources Development Department, Government of Sikkim, vide their letter dated 12.05.2017, even informed that EIILM never conducted the Master of Commerce course either on regular mode or distant mode and that this course is not an approved course by the UGD/DEC, as such, the course is not valid/genuine.
1 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2019 20:39:05 :::
LPA-1302-2019 - 2 -
Apart from the aforesaid factual position, the appeal is reported to be barred by delay and laches of 416 days in filing the appeal. The delay has been sought to be explained by the appellant by making the averments in the application under section 5 of the Limitation Act that after being dismissed from service, since he was unemployed, could not arrange funds for filing the appeal and somehow after arranging the funds from relatives, the present appeal has been filed. The explanation submitted is too vague to be believed. It appears that these averments have been cooked up only to explain the delay and laches in filing the appeal and do not inspire any confidence.
In our considered opinion, the aforesaid explanation submitted by the appellant for condonation of inordinate delay of 416 in filing the appeal does not constitute a sufficient cause.
Accordingly, we are not inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal and application under section 5 of the Limitation Act stands dismissed. As a result, the appeal stands dismissed as barred by limitation.
(KRISHNA MURARI) CHIEF JUSTICE (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE 18.07.2019 parkash NOTE:
Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2019 20:39:05 ::: LPA-1302-2019 - 3 -
3 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 25-08-2019 20:39:05 :::