https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188515 In writ jurisdiction under Article 226, inordinate unexplained delay and laches can independently justify refusal of discretionary relief, even where no third-party rights have intervened. The Court noted that the rejection of the post-confirmation petition had been duly communicated, the petitioner remained silent for many years, and the surrounding facts supported the Union's version; on that basis, the challenge to the military punishment was barred by laches. The contention that the impugned order was without jurisdiction was also not established, and the High Court's refusal to interfere was upheld, with the special leave petition rejected. en-us Wed, 30 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Dec 2016 17:03:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188515 In writ jurisdiction under Article 226, inordinate unexplained delay and laches can independently justify refusal of discretionary relief, even where no third-party rights have intervened. The Court noted that the rejection of the post-confirmation petition had been duly communicated, the petitioner remained silent for many years, and the surrounding facts supported the Union's version; on that basis, the challenge to the military punishment was barred by laches. The contention that the impugned order was without jurisdiction was also not established, and the High Court's refusal to interfere was upheld, with the special leave petition rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 30 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188515