Nearly nine years after the rejection of his revision the petitioner rose from his slumber like Rip-Van-Winkle and filed the instant petition in the year 1998. It is apparent that if the petitioner were to file a civil suit challenging the penalty imposed upon him the same would have been dismissed as barred by limitation. 33. It is settled law that a good measure to determine whether a writ petition is hit by delay and laches is to see the period for limitation for filing a suit if the challenge was by way of suit and if the suit was barred by limitation, the same would be a measure to hold that the writ petition suffers from delay and laches. The cause sought to be resuscitated by the petitioner by filing the instant writ petition nearly nine years after the rejection of his revision is incapable of being brought to life, more so when the plea relating to issuance of note of disagreement by the Disciplinary Authority does not find a reflection in the pleadings made in the instant petition, and thus the writ petition is dismissed.