Himachal Pradesh High Court
Shri Suresh Negi vs Himachal Pradesh University on 22 April, 2026
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT
SHIMLA
CWP No.4646 of 2026
Decided on 22nd April, 2026
Shri Suresh Negi
.
...Petitioner
Versus
Himachal Pradesh University
...Respondent
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
of
1
Whether approved for reporting?
For the petitioner: M/s Babita Chauhan and M.A. Safee,
rt Advocates.
For the respondent: Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for
the following reliefs:-
i) “That a writ in the nature of Certiorari may
kindly be issued quashing and setting aside
the impugned order dated 27.03.2023(Annexure P-9) whereby the representation of
the Petitioner has been rejected, being
arbitrary, non-speaking and violative of Articles14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
ii) That a writ in the nature of Mandamus may
kindly be issued directing the Respondents to
directing the Respondents to reckon the
service of the Petitioner from the date of
issuance of the appointment order dated
::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:18:00 :::CIS
28.09.2016 for the purpose of regularization
by condoning the joining period and to grant all
consequential benefit and regularize his
services w.e.f. October 2019 i.e. w.e.f.
25.10.2017 the date from which his
.
counterparts have been regularized, alongwith
all consequential benefits.”
2. The impugned memorandum which is appended
with the petition is Annexure P-9, dated 27.03.2023.
of
3. Upon a query put to the learned counsel as to how
the petitioner explains delay and laches in approaching the
rt
Court after more than 3 years from the date of passing of the
impugned order, learned counsel submitted that it is only in the
year 2025 when the petitioner received information under Right
to Information Act, he came to know of the date of dispatch of
his appointment order.
4. This Court is of the considered view that this no
explanation in the eyes of law. The petitioner has assailed
Annexure P-9, dated 27.03.2023 by way of this petition.
Annexure P-9 was issued by the Authority on a request made
by the petitioner itself to the Authority. Copy thereof is duly
endorsed to the petitioner. It is not the case of the petitioner
that he did not receive said copy.
::: Downloaded on – 24/04/2026 11:18:00 :::CIS
5. Therefore, as the present petition is hit by gross
delay and laches and as this Court does not finds any reason to
.
allow the petitioner to assail the impugned order after three
years of its having been passed, the petition is dismissed on
the ground of delay and laches.
6. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also
of
stand disposed of.
rt (Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge
April 22, 2026
(Vinod)
::: Downloaded on - 24/04/2026 11:18:00 :::CIS
