HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 10285 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J. HON'BLE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Sri Sanjay Kumar Om, learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 & 6. 2. Sri Sanjay Kumar Om, learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 & 6 has produced instruction dated 16.04.2025, which is taken on record. 3. At the very out set, Sri Sanjay Kumar Om, learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 & 6 submitted that impugned order has been passed on 26.09.2022 whereas it has been challenged before this Court on 04.04.2025 i.e. more than 800 days without any proper explanation of delay. Therefore, petition may be dismissed on the ground of laches coupled with the fact that work allotted to the petitioner has now been allotted to respondent no. 7 on 18.10.2022. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner has opposed the aforesaid submissions and submitted that delay has been explained in paragraph-9 of the affidavit filed along with writ petition. 5. We have considered the submissions advanced by counsels for parties and perused the records as well as affidavit filed alongwith writ petition. 6. Delay in filing writ petition is explained in Paragraph-9 of the affidavit and the same is being quoted below:- "That the petitioner could not filed he present writ petition in time before this Hon'ble Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Lal Chandra Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Sanjay Kumar Om Dr Bheem Rao Ambedkar Harijan .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) Court due to sole reason alone that the petitioner has endevoured his best by submitted the representation before the higher authority subject to cancellation of impugned order dated 26.09.2022 shall be cancelled/cancelled. But the same was not cancelled till date. The delay is not willful/deliberate one, if there is no any undue delay/same may be condoned in the interest of petitioner." 7. From the perusal of Paragraph-9 of the affidavit, reasons so given for delay is not convincing. 8. Therefore, under such facts, writ petition is dismissed on the ground of laches. 9. No order as to costs. October 8, 2025 Sartaj WRIC No. 10285 of 2025 2 (Vivek Kumar Singh,J.) (Neeraj Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- SARTAJ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad