( 2025:HHC:4015 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP No. 2520 of 2025 Decided on: 27th February, 2025 ____________________________________________________ Union of India and others ....Petitioners. Versus No. 13735115Y Ex.Sep Munshi Ram ...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 20.12.2021 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal. 2. Initially the case was filed on 13.08.2024 before this Court almost after a period of three years. On account of certain objections being raised by the Registry, the case had been returned on 14.08.2024. Resultantly, miscellaneous application being CMP No. 2560 of 2025 has been filed for condonation of delay in re- filing the Writ petition after removing the objections. The objections have been removed, therefore, in such circumstances, 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - we condone the delay as such and allow the CMP No. 2560 of 2025. 3. 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. The position in this case is even worse and therefore the present Writ petition is dismissed on delay and laches. The relevant paragraphs 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 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 - 3 - 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.” 4. Position is worse in this case that even after getting an order in his favour the respondent/Ex-service man, who had been granted disability pension, filed an execution petition bearing MA(E) 1221 of 2022 in OA 1311 of 2020. The Tribunal had noticed the non-compliance of the order having been passed against the Union of India and imposed cost of Rs.25000/- on 14.07.2023 and resultantly issued bailable warrants against the concerned officials and directed to make compliance by the next date while listing the matter on 03.09.2024. Apparently, after the costs were imposed miscellaneous applications came to be filed - 4 - seeking leave to appeal and for condonation of delay of 369 days’ before the Tribunal, which were dismissed on 03.02.2023. Cost has now been paid as informed by counsel for Union of India, on instructions. 5. In our considered opinion, the employee as such was seeking implementation of the order which had been passed in his favour way back on 20.12.2021 and also filed necessary execution petition, no plausible reasons as such for not approaching the Court of competent jurisdiction to challenge the said order has been given. Resultantly we dismiss the Writ petition on the ground of delay and laches. 6. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice 27th February, 2025 ( Ranjan Sharma ) (priti) Judge