Allahabad High Court
NEERAJ BHADAURIYAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the petitioner’s inordinate delay amounts to laches, precluding any relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Neeraj Bhadauriya, filed a writ petition seeking re‑appointment as Shiksha Mitra in a primary school after being denied the post following her marriage in 2006. She alleged that despite repeated representations, the authorities failed to act. The respondents argued that the petition was filed after a delay of nearly 19 years and should be dismissed on the ground of laches, relying on precedent. The court accepted the respondents' contention, noting that a dormant claimant cannot later agitate the right, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Central Coalfields Ltd. v. Parden Oraon. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition for want of a timely claim.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner’s delay of nearly 19 years bars the relief on the ground of laches
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to re‑appointment as Shiksha Mitra despite the lapse of time
Subjects
- writ petition
- laches
- appointment
- administrative law
- service law
- delay
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6749 of 2026
Neeraj Bhadauriya
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dharmendra Kumar Singh, Karan
Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Shivendra Kumar Singh
Court No. - 52
HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the
State-respondents and Mr. Pramendra Pratap Singh, Advocate holding
brief of Mr. Shivendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-
BSA.
The petitioner has preferred instant writ petition with a prayer to direct the
respondent-authorities to re-appoint the petitioner on the post of Shiksha
Mitra in the Primary School Sahiyapur, Block Umarda, District Kannauj
as well as further prayer to direct the respondents-authorities to decide the
petitioner's representation within stipulated period.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was selected
for the post of Shiksha Mitra in the year 2006. However, after her
marriage, when she returned to join the said post, she was informed that
someone else had been appointed in her place. Since then, she has been
representing before the respondents-authorities, but despite her repeated
representations, no action has been taken till date.
Learned counsel for the respondent-BSA submits that there is delay of
nearly 19 years in filing the writ petition, which has not been explained,
therefore, the petition may be dismissed on the ground of laches itself. In
support of his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Bhagirath Prasad Sharma
vs. State of U.P. and 4 Others, decided on 09.07.2024 passed in Writ-
A No.9709 of 2024 (Neutral Citation No.- 2024:AHC:111436).
WRIA No. 6749 of 2026
2
It is settled law that a person, who is not vigilant and dormant about
his/her right, cannot be allowed to agitate his/her right as has been held by
the Apex Court in the case of Central Coalfields Limited through its
Chairman and Managing Director & Ors. Vs. Parden Oraon
reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 299.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds no good ground to entertain the
present writ petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.)
May 6, 2026
Jitendra/-
Digitally signed by :-
JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…