The court emphasized that negligence in litigation cannot be condoned beyond statutory limits, reinforcing the principle of timely action in legal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

G.S. Sandhawalia , C.J.

CMP (M) 1259 of 2024 has been filed for condoning the delay in filing the present appeal, since the judgment was passed by the learned Single Judge on 21.12.2023 in CWPOA No. 3319 of 2020.

2. In the application, it is mentioned that the appeal could not be filed within time as there was vacation in the Court and mother-in-law of the appellant, who was residing in Kishtwar District, was suffering from geriatric disease, but later on she was detected with malignancy of cervix, due to which he had to visit different hospitals for the treatment of his mother-in-law.

3. The application was contested by the respondents-State by filing reply, wherein the averments made in the application were denied.

4. Keeping in view the settled principles of law laid down in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. Smt. Katiji and others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 , that each and every day’s delay is not to be explained, we are of the considered opinion that the application is liable to be allowed as sufficient cause has been made out. Accordingly, the application is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

5. However, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge on merits, whereby the original application/writ petition was dismissed, since there was inordinate delay in approaching the H.P. State Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘the Tribunal) as such.

6. The learned Single Judge had noticed that there was a delay of seven years in challenging the impugned order (Annexure A-11) pertaining to compulsory retirement of the appellant. The impugned order was passed on 03.11.2010 which was sought to be challenged before the Tribunal by filing the Original Application. The said application was transferred to this Court which was registered as CWPOA No. 3319 of 2020 and the same was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment dated 21.12.2023.

7. The learned Single Judge had relied upon the Seven Judges Bench judgment of the Apex Court rendered in S.S. Rathore Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh , (1989) 4 SCC 582.

8. Learned Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in Union of India & others Vs. Tarsem Singh, (2008) 8 SCC 648 to submit that it was recurring cause of action.

9. We have gone through the aforesaid judgment, which is not applicable in the present case as that was a case of disability pension and the writ petitioner therein was invalidated out of army service, in medical category. There was delay in approaching the High Court and limited relief had been granted by the learned Single Judge. Thereafter, the matter was taken to the Division Bench of the High Court, since the employee was not satisfied by the decision of the Single Judge as arrears were not released beyond 38 months. The appeal was allowed by the High Court and it was held that the employee was entitled to disability pension from the date it fell due and the same would not have been restricted to a period of three years and two months prior to the filing of the writ petition and the interest was also granted.

10. In such circumstances, Union of India had taken the matter to the Apex Court, wherein the appeals of the Union of India were allowed, limiting the relief only for three years years before the date of writ petition. In such circumstance, the observations flowed that principles regarding recurring wrongs would be applicable and the High Court would have restricted the arrears and consequential relief. Therefore, the said judgment is not applicable to the present case.

11. In the present case, the issue was regarding the penalty of reduction to a lower stage by order dated 17.08.2009. An appeal had been preferred by the present appellant before the Appellate Authority and during the pendency of the same, the Appellate Authority had issued a show cause notice to the appellant-petitioner stating therein that the punishment imposed upon him was on the lessor sid