Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Union Of India vs No 14367388X Ex Naik Pritam Singh on 26 August, 2025
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2506-DB
Sr. No.10
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 1896/2024
1. Union of India, .... Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Ministry of Defence, South
Block, New Delhi-110011
2. Additional Director General
Personnel Services, Adjutant
General's Branch, Integrated HQ
of Ministry of Defence (army),
DHQ PO, New Delhi-110 001.
3. OIC Records, Artillery Records,
Nasik Camp Road, C/o 56 APO.
4. Principal Controller of Defence
Accounts (Pensions), Draupadi
Ghat, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh-
211014.
Through:- Mr. Vishal Sharma, Sr. Advocate
with
Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, CGSC
V/s
No 14367388X Ex Naik Pritam Singh, .....Respondent(s)
S/o Late Shri Dharam Singh,
R/o Village: Baspur Parlah,
Post Office: Arnia, Tehsil: RS Pura,
District: Jammu (J&K).
Through:- None
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICESANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER
26.08.2025
(ORAL)
1. Impugned in this petition, filed by Union of India under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, is an order dated 26.09.2018 passed in
OA No. 460/2018 titled “Pritam Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors.”
3 WP(C) No. 1896/2024
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2506-DB
whereby, the Tribunal has allowed the OA relied upon the judgment
passed in the case of “Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ram Avtar” Civil
Appeal No. 418/2012 decided on 12.12.2014 and held the
respondent entitled to the benefit of rounding off along with interest
@ of 8% per annum from the date of order.
2. The impugned judgment is challenged on the ground that the
Tribunal has not appreciated that the respondent had approached the
Tribunal after more than two decades of the accrual of cause of
action and, therefore, could not have been held entitled to the
arrears for the entire period. However, the stand of the respondent is
that this petition is hit by delay and laches as the petitioners have
approached this Court after more than six years of passing of the
judgment in OA No. 416/2018.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
judgment impugned, we are of the considered opinion that this
petition is hit by delay and laches.
4. Indisputably, OA No. 460/2018 was decided by the Tribunal on
26.09.2018, whereas, the instant petition has been filed in the year
2024 i.e. after about six years of the passing of the judgment. It has
also been brought to our notice that the judgment impugned was
implemented by the respondents partially, whereas, with regard to
the payment of arrears, the petitioners are contesting the matter
before the Tribunal. The execution petition filed before the Tribunal
in the year 2020 is still under consideration.
5. We have gone through the memorandum of writ petition in its
entirety and do not find any good explanation coming forth to
3 WP(C) No. 1896/2024
2025:JKLHC-JMU:2506-DB
explain the delay of about six years in approaching this Court.
Relying upon the earlier judgment passed by a Division Bench of
this Court dated 15.07.2025 in WP(C) No. 1804/2025, we find this
petition hit by inordinate delay and laches.
6. For the foregoing reasons, we are not inclined to entertain this
petition and the same, is accordingly, dismissed along with
connected application(s), if any.
7. Dismissal of this petition on the ground of delay and laches shall
not prejudice the petitioners in respect of their stand, if any, taken
by them or to be taken by them, before the Tribunal in the
execution proceedings.
(Sanjay Parihar) (Sanjeev Kumar)
Judge Judge
JAMMU
26.08.2025
Diksha
Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No
[ad_1]
Source link