(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI) 1. We have heard Ms.Mamta Vyas, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Ms.Jirga Jhaveri, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. Since there is no dispute on facts for deciding the present Appeals, therefore, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, these matter is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.
3. The short facts are that the appellant institution applied for grant of approval for appointment of a peon for which a proposal was sent by the appellant to the District Education Officer. The matter remained pending before the District Education Officer and when the principal of the Institution went to the office of the District Education Officer, an order dated 27.10.2009 was received by him that the appellant institution is not entitled to appoint a peon. This order dated 27.10.2009 has been challenged by the institution by means of Special Civil Application before this Court. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the petitioner though, had come to know about the impugned order passed by the District Education Officer in May,2010, but the writ petition had been filed after a delay of seven months on 30.12.2010. It is well settled that law of limitation does not apply to writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Only delay and latches has to be explained by the petitioner in the writ petition.
4. We have gone through the record of the writ petition. There is no explanation for delay or latches and delay from May,2010 to 30.12.2010, neither there is any whisper that delay was caused by which reason. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. The Appeal is devoid of any merits and is accordingly dismissed.
(V.M.SAHAI,J) (A.J.DESAI,J) ***vcdarji