Devendra Kumar Arora, J. - (1.) NOTICES on behalf of opposite parties have been accepted by the learned Chief Standing Counsel.
(2.) BY means of present writ petition, the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.03.2005, passed by the opposite party No. 2, as contained in Annexure -1 to the writ petition. No explanation has been given by the Petitioner for challenging the order dated 07.03.2005 after more than five years.
(3.) THE Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case reported in : 2009 (2) SCC 479, S.S. Balu and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors. pleased to observe as under: It is also well settled principle of law that "delay defeats equity". The Government Order was issued on 15.01.2002. The Appellants did not file any writ application questioning the legality and validity thereof. Only after the writ petitions filed by others were allowed and the State of Kerala preferred an appeal there against, they impleaded themselves as party -Respondents. It is now a trite law that where the writ Petitioner approaches the High Court after a long delay, reliefs prayed for may be denied to them on the ground of delay and laches irrespective of the fact that they are similarly situated to the other candidates who obtain the benefit of the judgment. It is, thus, not possible for us to issue any direction to the State of Kerala or the Commission to appoint the Appellants at this stage.;