Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45651-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 329 of 2025 Appellant :- Abhishek Gupta Respondent :- U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission Thru. Secy. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Shubham Gupta,Suneel Kumar Singh Kalhans Counsel for Respondent :- Gaurav Mehrotra,C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. (Order on C.M. Application No.1 of 2025) 1. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 2. Heard Shri Suneel Kumar Singh Kalhans, learned counsel for the appellant, Ms. Maria Fatima, Advocate whose Power on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2 is taken on record and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondent no.3. 3. The cause shown for the delay in filing the appeal is sufficient. 4. The application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned and we proceed to hear the appeal. (Order on appeal) 5. This is an appeal against the judgment of Writ Court dated 06.05.2025 passed in Writ A No.4948 of 2025, by which the writ petition of the appellant/ petitioner seeking a mandamus to the opposite parties therein, to appoint him on the post of Subordinate Agriculture Service Class 3 Technical Assistant Group C on the basis of reserved quota for dependents of Freedom Fighters in the interest of justice, has been declined on the ground of delay and laches. The selection took place four years prior to the filing of writ petition and the result was declared on 19.06.2021. The writ petition was filed in May, 2025. 6. In the aforesaid context learned counsel for the appellant/ petitioner states that considerations of substantial justice should prevail over all other considerations as it is paramount and pivotal to the justice delivery system and uncalled for and unnecessary emphasis should not have been laid on delay and laches. We respectfully disagree with the contention of learned counsel for the appellant/ petitioner in the facts of this case, for the reason that delay and laches is a relevant parameter to be taken into consideration by the writ court. In this case, the result of the selection was declared on 19.06.2021 and no such explanation was offered before the writ court nor is being offered before us as to why the appellant/ petitioner did not approach the writ court earlier. Merely because he was collecting information can hardly be an explanation. 7. We do not find any error in the facts of this case in the judgment rendered by the writ court, even after going through the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Esha Bhattacharjee vs. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy and others reported in (2013) 12 SCC 649, as, application of principles of law depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case and in a case of recruitment, where, not only the result was declared on 19.06.2021 but, the same was also acted upon, the writ court cannot be said to be at fault for not entertaining the writ petition after four years of the said event. 8. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. (Manish Kumar, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.) Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Arnima Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench