IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, C.J., RANJAN SHARMA
Govt. of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Thakur – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
G.S. Sandhawalia, C.J.
The present appeal is barred by one year, eleven months and twenty days, as per report of the office. The learned Single Judge decided the issue on 22.11.2022, in CWPOA No.116 of 2019 directing that the writ petitioner-employee be regularized from the date he had completed eight years service against the post of Junior Engineer. On account of the delay we are not proceeding to examine the matter on merits.
2. A perusal of certified copy of judgment wouldgo to show that it was applied on 17.9.2024, almost two years post the decision. The State has averred that the judgment was downloaded from the website on 30.11.2022, and an explanation has sought to be given that record relating to 116 employees of various categories in the position under the Integrated Watershed Management Project [IWMP] and those engaged in Pre-IWMP was to be scanned and therefore, it took considerable time for gathering information and justification is sought till 06.08.2023. It has further been averred that the delay had not been occasioned deliberately or on account of malafide, though, it has been mentioned that the department has initiated disciplinary action against the errin
The State must demonstrate diligence in prosecuting matters and cannot claim a separate period of limitation; a liberal approach to condonation of delay must consider the party's conduct.
An application for condonation of delay must demonstrate plausible reasons; mere bureaucratic delays do not justify extending time limits for appeals.
Delay in filing a petition cannot be condoned without plausible justification, regardless of the party's status, emphasizing adherence to the law of limitation.
Delay in filing an appeal may not be condoned without a sufficient cause shown, emphasizing the importance of diligence and adherence to limitation periods in judicial proceedings.
Sufficient cause must be demonstrated for condonation of delay; bureaucratic inefficiencies do not qualify as valid reasons under law, as legal deadlines apply equally to all parties.
The court emphasized that government entities must demonstrate diligence in adhering to the statutory limit for appeal filing and cannot claim special treatment in delay situations without sufficient....
The court ruled that bureaucratic delays do not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing appeals, emphasizing that the law of limitation binds all parties.
The court emphasized that delays in filing appeals must be justified with valid explanations, particularly for governmental entities, and that mere bureaucratic inefficiencies do not warrant leniency....
Administrative lethargy and bureaucratic delays do not constitute sufficient cause for condoning inordinate delays by state in filing appeals; bona fides and vigilance required.
The law of limitation binds all parties, including the government, and requires reasonable explanations for delays in filing appeals.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.