Narendra Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for Petitioner.
(2.) PETITIONER has preferred this writ petition before this Court on 01.08.2011 challenging the impugned order dated 26.03.2008 (Annexure -10), whereby sanction was granted against Petitioner for his prosecution under the provisions of The Prevention of Corruption Act. Writ petition has been filed with a delay of about 3 -1/2 years. From the contents of writ petition, it is clear that no sufficient cause has been shown by the Petitioner for not filing the writ petition at the earliest. During the course of arguments, learned Counsel for Petitioner admitted that impugned order dated 26.03.2008 granting sanction for prosecuting the Petitioner was served upon him along with copy of charge -sheet filed against him in Criminal Court.
(3.) ALTHOUGH , no period of limitation is prescribed for filing writ petition, but the same is required to be filed at the earliest. If the writ petition has been filed after a delay of reasonable period without any reasonable explanation for such delay, the writ petition can be dismissed on the ground of delay in filing the writ petition.;