Allahabad High Court
ARVIND KUMAR TIWARIversusTHE STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES DEPTT. AND 5 OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed off/Decided on merits
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of laches.
Summary
The petitioner Arvind Kumar Tiwari sought to set aside the 2016 selection of certain respondents under a government advertisement, alleging irregularities discovered via a Right to Information (RTI) request. The respondents argued that the petition was barred by laches, noting that the RTI application was filed only in October 2020, nearly four years after the advertisement, and the writ petition was filed three years later in February 2023. The court examined the timeline, finding no justification for the delay and observing that the selected respondents had already been appointed, rendering a mandamus order ineffective. Consequently, the court held that the petition was barred by laches. The writ petition was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petition is barred by laches due to the delay in filing the RTI application and subsequent writ petition
- Whether a mandamus can be issued to compel the respondents to fill vacancies after appointment
Legislation cited
Subjects
- laches
- writ petition
- mandamus
- Right to Information Act
- selection process
- administrative law
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
WRIT - A No. - 1755 of 2023
Arvind Kumar Tiwari
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Khadi
And Village Industries Deptt. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mahendra Kumar Dwivedi, Abhishek
Kumar Dwivedi, Abid Alvi, Prem
Shankar, Varsha Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ayush Tandon, Gaurav
Mehrotra, Pankaj Patel, Ran Vijay
Singh
Court No. - 4
HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J.
1. Supplementary counter affidavit filed today by Sri Ayush Tandon,
learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 is taken on
record.
2. Although the matter had been heard at length on 03.09.2025,
however, today a preliminary objection has been taken by the learned
counsel appearing for the respondents that there are gross laches in
filing the instant petition for setting aside the selection of respondents
No.4, 5 and 6, which has been made in the year 2016 in pursuance of
the advertisement dated 10.06.2016, a copy of which is annexure-2
to the petition.
3. Responding, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that as
the information under the Right to Information Act has only been
made available to him in the year 2019, but since only partial
information was given, an appeal was thereafter filed before the
appellate authority, which was only decided on 02.01.2023, a copy of
which is annexure-1 to the petition, as such, the instant petition has
only been filed thereafter and thus, there are no laches.
4. A perusal of the application that has been filed by the petitioner
under the Right to Information Act indicates that the application itself
WRIA No. 1755 of 2023
2
is dated 22.10.2020, a copy of which is annexure-9 to the petition.
5. Thus, the statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner that
the information had been applied for in the year 2019 gets belied from
the very application filed by the petitioner in October, 2020, which
incidentally also does not indicate anywhere that the information had
been applied for in the year 2019.
6. Even otherwise, by the time the information was applied for in
October 2020, a period of almost four years had lapsed since the
issuance of the advertisement and the selection of the private
respondents.
7. No reasons thus emerge as to why it took the petitioner four years
to file an application under the Right to Information Act and three
years thereafter to file the instant petition, which has been filed in
February 2023.
8. Considering this that the private respondents have already been
appointed and even if vacancies are available with the respondents,
no mandamus can be issued to the respondents to fill in the said
vacancies.
9. Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition is
dismissed on the ground of laches.
September 23, 2025
cks/-
(Abdul Moin,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
CHANDRA KANT SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,
Lucknow Bench
Checking your session…