https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169771 Delay and laches can bar writ relief under Article 226 where a claim is pursued after an inordinate lapse of time and the delay is not satisfactorily explained by repeated representations. Mere representations do not revive a stale claim, and unexplained delay may justify refusal of discretionary relief, especially where intervention could unsettle settled positions. The Court also noted that whether Clause 4 of the settlement applied to the workman was not suitable for adjudication in writ jurisdiction. On that basis, the writ petition was held barred by delay and laches, and no relief was granted. en-us Tue, 04 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Nov 2015 19:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169771 Delay and laches can bar writ relief under Article 226 where a claim is pursued after an inordinate lapse of time and the delay is not satisfactorily explained by repeated representations. Mere representations do not revive a stale claim, and unexplained delay may justify refusal of discretionary relief, especially where intervention could unsettle settled positions. The Court also noted that whether Clause 4 of the settlement applied to the workman was not suitable for adjudication in writ jurisdiction. On that basis, the writ petition was held barred by delay and laches, and no relief was granted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 04 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169771