215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.1911 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.03.2025 Manju Dhanda …..Appellant. Versus Kurukshetra University Kurukshetra and another .....Respondents. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA ***** Present:- Ms. Shweta, Advocate for Mr. Rajesh Goyal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. R.S. Rana, Advocate for the respondents. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) We are not satisfied with the reasons given out in the application for condonation of delay of 583 days in filing the appeal. The reason coming forward is inadvertent oversight resulting in the brief of the appeal being misplaced. However, no supporting document to show that the brief was misplaced and a search was carried out in the High Court or elsewhere has been produced by the appellant. 2. We also notice that even the writ-petition was filed after three years of resigning from service and after the resignation was duly accepted by the Vice-Chancellor of the respondent-University. No reasons have been YAG DUTT 2025.03.24 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment LPA No.1911 of 2019 (O&M) -2- put forward as to why the petitioner did not approach the Court for three years. 3. Thus, it is a case of long slumber of the appellant which continues even before she came to the Court in the writ-petition. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed on the ground of gross laches and delay. Application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal also stands dismissed. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) March 19, 2025 JUDGE Yag Dutt Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No YAG DUTT 2025.03.24 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment