JUDGMENT :

Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.

1. With a view to resuscitating the time-barred lis, the present application has been filed by the State of West Bengal and its functionaries, seeking condonation of a delay of 1,389 days in filing the proposed appeal, which aims to challenge the ex-parte order dated 11.03.2019 passed in WPA 18015 of 2019.

2. The order dated 11.03.2019 mandated the respondents/applicants to grant a higher scale of pay to the petitioner, who joined the School with a Post Graduate degree in Physical Education, and to fix her salary accordingly, effective from 16.01.2009, within a specified time-frame. Additionally, the order directed the payment of both current and arrear salaries within the prescribed time. The order further stipulated that if the arrears and current salary were paid within the specified time, no interest would be payable. However, in case of failure to comply, the petitioner would be entitled to simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum from 16.01.2009 until the actual payment, in addition to proceeding of contempt of court.

3. The capsulated form of the facts, as unfurled in the writ petition, is that the petitioner participated in the 1999 Regional Selection Test organized by the West Bengal Central School Service Commission for the post of Assistant Teacher in Physical Education (Southern Region). The petitioner emerged as a successful candidate and, accordingly, was recommended for the post at Saptagram Kishore Bharati Girls High School, Bishorpara, 24 Parganas (North) (hereinafter referred to as the 'School').

4. Based on a letter of appointment, the petitioner joined the post on 23.02.2001. Her appointment was subsequently approved by the District Inspector of Schools through Memo No. 275/G dated 28.06.2001. Prior to joining, she had completed her M.P.Ed. degree. Therefore, under the applicable ROPA Rules, she was entitled to a higher scale of pay. Consequently, she made a representation through the proper channel to the competent authority, praying for the grant of the higher scale of pay. However, despite receiving her representation, it was left unattended, which prompted the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the writ petition, citing inaction by the concerned authority in considering her prayer for the higher scale of pay.

5. The order sought to be challenged in this appeal indicates that the learned Single Bench felt the writ petition needed to be decided after the exchange of affidavits. Accordingly, the applicants were directed to file an affidavit-in- opposition. However, they failed to file the affidavit, and even on 11.03.2019, when the writ petition was taken up for hearing, the State remained unrepresented. As a result, the learned Single Bench decided the writ petition by passing the ex parte order on 11.03.2019. Aggrieved by this order, the applicants filed the proposed appeal. However, as the appeal was filed 1389 days beyond the statutory period of limitation provided therefor, this application for condonation of delay has been made.

6. Mr. Das, learned advocate representing the applicants, submits that the delay was caused by unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the applicants. He argues that the order sought to be challenged in this appeal was passed ex parte, and as a result, the applicants had no knowledge of the order. Upon learning about the order, the applicants decided to file the appeal, but due to the COVID-19 pandemic, they were unable to do so within the prescribed period of limitation. He contends that initially, the applicants engaged one advocate to prefer the appeal but he failed to do so within the prescribed period and as such, the learned advocate-on-record was engaged to prefer appeal. He urges that taking note of these factors, a leeway be granted to the applicants and delay in preferring the appeal be condoned. To lend support to his submission, he refers to the judgment delivered in Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 2022 in