Reasonable delay bars Article 226 relief when a writ challenge to an assessment order is filed years late.

The Madras HC held that a writ petition challenging an assessment order can be refused where the petitioner approaches the Court after an unreasonable delay. Although no limitation period governs Article 226 proceedings, a litigant seeking discretionary relief must act within a reasonable time. Here, the petitioner filed the writ petition years after the assessment order and had earlier received notice referring to the demand, yet took no timely steps to obtain or challenge the order. On those facts, the Court declined discretionary relief and dismissed the writ petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the assessment order was liable to be dismissed on the ground that the petitioner approached the Court after an unreasonable delay and was therefore not entitled to discretionary relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The order challenged was dated 09.01.2019, while the writ petition was filed only on 24.05.2024. The Court noted that the petitioner had received notice in 2020 referring to the demand raised pursuant to the impugned order, yet took no steps to obtain the order or challenge it within a reasonable time. Though no period of limitation governs proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court held that a litigant must still approach the Court within a reasonable time when seeking discretionary relief.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to discretionary relief, and the writ petition was dismissed.

---