Subsequent acquittal and representations do not revive a stale challenge to a discharge order.

The appellant, a Home Guards Sainik, was discharged on 15 October 2015 following registration of an FIR, without a departmental enquiry or hearing.

He was acquitted on 14 January 2016.

After allegedly making representations seeking reinstatement, he filed a writ petition in 2024 challenging the discharge order.

The Single Judge dismissed the petition as barred by delay and laches; the appellant appealed and also sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Whether the writ petition challenging the 2015 discharge order was liable to dismissal for delay and laches, despite the appellant’s subsequent acquittal and alleged representations

Whether the discharge order or the Single Judge’s decision disclosed any ground for appellate interference on the merits

A person who fails to challenge an adverse order within a reasonable time cannot ordinarily invoke writ jurisdiction after an unreasonable delay; successive representations do not, by themselves, revive a stale claim or create a fresh cause of action.

Subsequent acquittal does not automatically undo the consequences of an earlier discharge where the discharge order was not challenged within a reasonable period.

The appellant cited Nar Singh Pal v. Union of India, (2000) 3 SCC 588, and Commissioner of Police v. Sandeep Kumar, (2011) 4 SCC 644; the judgment records those authorities as the appellant’s reliance but does not discuss or apply them in its reasoning.

The discharge order was made on 15 October 2015, but the appellant approached the Court only in 2024, after nearly nine years.

The Court held that neither the subsequent acquittal nor the alleged representations revived the stale claim or supplied a fresh cause of action.

It also found no subsequent order or event capable of invalidating the discharge order and concluded that the appellant had shown no independent ground for interference on the merits.

It dismissed the writ appeal and disposed of the application for condonation of delay, with no order as to costs.