( 2025:HHC:4020 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 2308 of 2025 Decided on: 27th February, 2025 ____________________________________________________ Union of India and others ....Petitioners. Versus No. JC-2443300P Hony NB Sub Prakash Chand ….Respondent ________________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners: Mr. Balram Sharma, Deputy Solicitor General of India with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (oral) The present Writ petition is directed against the order dated 14.03.2019 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal. 2. In our considered opinion, the case is already covered by the principles laid down in CWP no. 2522 of 2025 titled as Union of India and others vs. Pawna Devi alongwith connected matters, decided on 25.02.2025, which read as under. “25. It is not the case of Union of India that there is any fraud or misrepresentation in the present set of cases, whereby mainly the legal representatives of the Armed Forces are 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - seeking redressal of their rights. The State or the public body can be given some acceptable latitude keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the principle of limitation and though no precise formula, as such, can be laid down, but we cannot brush aside the fact that the parties in view of the orders passed by the Tribunal could have also resorted to getting the orders executed by filing appropriate remedies and Tribunal has also granted the benefit of penal interest, if the payment is not made within the prescribed period. Inspite of this fact the Union of India chose to sit tight and chose not to file the writ petitions within a reasonable period which can be classified as one year and beyond the same, no indulgence can be granted. 26. Therefore, the period prior to 18.10.2023 as such between the date of the decisions ranging from May/August/November, 2022 cannot be condoned in any manner and therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the present writ petitions are liable to be dismissed on the grounds of delay and laches as on account of Union of India not having resorted to its legal remedies expeditiously or even having made reasonable effort to challenge the said orders or even take a decision as such to challenge the said orders for a period of over one year. The latitude as such on account of laxity on the department, in such circumstances cannot be extended. 27. Without going into the merits of the cases, we are of the considered opinion that there is a delay of over a year from passing of the orders and no effort was made to challenge the order passed by the Tribunal within a reasonable time, therefore, on account of the opinion given on 18.09.2023, the Union of India cannot raise the issue on merits.” - 3 - 3. The position in this case is even worse and therefore the present Writ petition is liable to be dismissed on delay and laches. 4. Apparently, the applicant/ex-service man had filed an Execution petition bearing No. MA(E) 391 of 2020 in OA No. 3398 of 2018, which was pending, when the application for leave to appeal was filed, which was dismissed on 02.05.2023 by noticing delay of 1468 days. Thereafter, the Tribunal had also noticed vide order dated 05.09.2024 in the execution proceedings that no Writ petition has been filed and adjournment was being sought and Union of India has not implemented the order and thereafter noted that coercive process should be issued against the erring Officers. 5. The position in the present case is even worse in as much as after getting a denial order in the year 2019, the Union of India chose to file an application for leave to appeal against the said order, which was dismissed on 2nd May, 2023 (Annexue P-6). 6. It is in such circumstances, the present Writ petition has been filed on 01.02.2025 taking the stock plea which was noticed in the bunch of cases decided on 25.02.2025 in CWP No. - 4 - 2522 of 2025 (supra). No case is then made out to entertain the present Writ petition in view of the said principles and the matter being covered by the said decision. 7. In view of the above, the present Writ petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice 27th February, 2025 ( Ranjan Sharma ) (priti) Judge