- (1.) This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking to set aside the order dated 24.8.1994 passed by respondent No. 2 in Revenue Miscellaneous Appeal No. 96/1991-92 and further he has prayed for the mandamus to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with full back wages as well as consequential benefits.In nutshell, the petitioner is claiming to be the service of therespondent as Chaukidar of the village and he was appointed in the year 1980. Thereafter, it was directed to constitute a Committee and review to the appointment of the petitioner as he did not reside in the same village. It was further alleged in para- 8 of the petition that the committee did not find the petitioner competent to be appointed as Chowkidar.
(2.) Being aggrieved with the said order, an appeal was preferred on 27.8.91 before respondent No. 2 being Revenue Misc. Appeal No. 96/1991-92. Thereafter, the appeal was posted for hearing on 24.8.1994 but due to illness, the petitioner could not appear before the court and the court has dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.
(3.) The learned counsel for the State-respondent contended that the order, which has been challenged before this Court is dated 24.8.1994 and the writ petition has been preferred in the year 2008 i.e. after lapse of 14 years. The petitioner has not explained the latches and delay in filing this petition and as such, the petition is liable to be dismissed in limine. After perusal of the record, it clearly reveals that the order impugned in this petition is dated 24.8.1994 and the learned counsel for the petitioner could not demonstrate me the explanation about the latches and delay of 14 years in filing this petition. The petition is liable to be dismissed on this score only.;