ANIL DEV SINGH,C.J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 25.2.2002, whereby the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to the appeal are as follows: The appellant who was working as Executive Engineer in Public Health and Engineering Department, Jhunjhunu, applied for casual leave from 5.12.1996 to 7.12.1996 and 9.12.1996 to 12.12.1996. The appellant also sought permission to leave station from 5.12.1996 to 12.12.1996 on account of some personal work which was to be attended by him at New Delhi. The Superintendent Engineer, Public Health and Engineering Department, sanctioned the leave as sought by the appellant. On 5.12.1996, the appellant while at New Delhi felt pain in his Chest. He was removed to Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, where the appellant as admitted in emergency ward around mid night. In the hospital the appellant was subjected to angiography test on 11.12.1996. Thereafter on 18.12.1996, the appellant was operated upon for bypass surgery at Escorts Heart Institution and Research Centre. For the operation and various tests performed on the appellant, the Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, raised a bill for Rs. 1,80,000/ -. On 3.3.1997 the appellant applied to the concerned authority for grant of Ex -post -facto sanction for payment of the bill of Rs. 1,80,000/ - to the Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi. On 18.10.1997 the Chief Engineer transmitted the application of the appellant to the Secretary, Public Health and Engineering Department, Rajasthan, Jaipur for grant of Ex -post -facto sanction as sought by the appellant. It appears that the matter remained in correspondence for some time and finally on 29.1.1999 the State rejected the request of the appellant. The appellant again submitted a representation to the concerned authority for grant of the Ex post -facto sanction of the aforesaid bill on 12.12.1999. In response to the representation, the Deputy Secretary on 1.4.1999, informed the appellant that there was no scope for relaxation of the rules. The appellant failing to receive a favourable response from the Government ultimately filed a writ petition in this Court on 6.2.2002. The learned Single Judge by the impugned order dismissed the writ petition only on the ground of delay and laches. The appellant not being satisfied with the order, filed the instant appeal. That is how the matter has been placed before us.
(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties. We have also gone through the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.;