Biswanath Somadder, J. - (1.) By consent of the parties, the appeal is treated as on day s list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay.
(2.) The instant appeal arises out of a judgment and order dated 17th August, 2018, passed by a learned Single Judge in W. P. 24832 (W) of 2017 (Lusku Soren vs. Union of India & Ors.). By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Single Judge proceeded to dismiss the writ petition, inter alia, on the ground of inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching the writ Court. For convenience, the impugned judgment and order is setout hereinbelow in its entirety:- The petitioner is a retired employee of United Bank of India. There was a disciplinary proceeding initiated against him which culminated in the imposition of the major penalty of reduction of basic pay. Against the said order the petitioner filed a statutory appeal which was rejected in the year 2009. The petitioner s review petition was also rejected in the year 2011. In the meantime, the petitioner has retired from service in the year 2016. After retiring from service the petitioner decided to challenge the entire disciplinary proceeding which was initiated in the year 2017.There is no explanation why the petitioner has waited for such a long period after all the stages of the disciplinary proceeding had been disposed of against him. If the petitioner was aggrieved he should have moved this writ petition within a proximate period from the last order passed by the respondents authorities. Instead he worked for five years in the bank and after he had retired he has taken out an application challenging the same which is not only not permissible but to entertain such a petition will amount abuse of the process of the Court.The writ petition is dismissed.There will be no order as to costs.
(3.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the writ petitioner.;