9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal from the date of the order and receiving of certified copy of the Judgment. It thus appears that the applicant has adopted a very lethargic attitude in the matter of filing the Letters Patent Appeal and has been negligent in that regard. Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the stand/explanation given by the appellant, it is opined that sufficient cause has not been shown to condone the huge period of delay in filing the appeal; accordingly, this application is dismissed. - HON BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE M. S. RAMACHANDRA RAO AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Appellants : Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, AC to AAG-III. For the Respondent : Mr. Krishna Murari, Adv. I.A. No. 6454 of 2024 in L.P.A. No. 279 of 2024 PE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opinion from Advocate General the same was put up before the Deputy Secretary on 12.10.2023. This huge delay of three months has not been explained by the appellant-State. 5. It has been further stated in the application for condonation of delay that the Deputy Secretary further forwarded it to the Joint Secretary on 16.10.2023. The Department decided to take opinion from Finance Department on 02.11.2023 and accordingly, the file was forwarded to the accounts section on 04.12.2023 for calculation of amount and LPC of the petitioner. After getting the same from the Account Section, it was forwarded to Nodal Officer, (law) of the Law Department. 6. Thereafter, on 27.12.2023, the dismissal order of the petitioner got approval from the Departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... given for preparation and the statement of fact was approved by 30.04.2024 and finally, the appeal was filed on 06.05.2024 after a delay of 404 days. 8. Form the facts narrated above, it is clear that though the judgment of the learned Single Judge was pronounced on 27.02.2023, but the file kept on moving from 03.04.2023 till 30.04.2024 from table to table and from officer to officer. It is not as if the applicant was not aware about the period for filing the Letters Patent Appeal, yet a delay of 404 days occurred in filing the appeal from the date of the order and receiving of certified copy of the Judgment. 9. It thus appears that the applicant has adopted a very lethargic attitude in the matter of filing the Letters Patent Appeal and has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay had occasioned. Though it was stated by the Department that the delay was due to unavoidable circumstances and genuine difficulties, the fact remains that from day one the Department or the person/persons concerned have not evinced diligence in prosecuting the matter to this Court by taking appropriate steps. 27. It is not in dispute that the person(s) concerned were well aware or conversant with the issues involved including the prescribed period of limitation for taking up the matter by way of filing a special leave petition in this Court. They cannot claim that they have a separate period of limitation when the Department was possessed with competent persons familiar with court proceedings. In the absence of plausible and acceptabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
