Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI
State of Jharkhand – Appellant
Versus
Ratneshwar Das – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
1. Both the intra-court appeals, filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arises out of common order dated 08.03.2022, hence they are taken up together.
2. The instant intra-court appeals, under Clause-10 of Letters Patent, are directed against the order/judgment dated 08.03.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 2290 of 2020 and W.P.(S) No. 2257 of 2020 respectively, whereby and whereunder, the writ petition was allowed setting aside order dated 22.08.2019 and directed the State to extend all consequential benefits with back wages to the petitioners.
I.A. No. 2077 of 2024 in LPA No. 16 of 2023 & I.A. No. 2076 of 2024 in LPA. No. 18 of 2023:
3. Both the appeals are barred by inordinate delay of 285 days, therefore, the instant Interlocutory Applications has been filed for condoning the aforesaid delay.
4. This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeals have been filed after inordinate delay of 285 days, deems it fit and proper, to first consider the delay condonation application before going into the legality and propriety of the impugned order on merit.
Grounds taken in the Int
The principle that the law of limitation must be strictly adhered to, and that a party seeking condonation of delay must provide a satisfactory and bona fide explanation for the delay, is fundamental....
The law of limitation must be strictly adhered to, and the burden lies on the party seeking condonation of delay to demonstrate sufficient cause, which must not be based on negligence or lack of bona....
The law of limitation must be strictly adhered to, and the burden of proving sufficient cause for delay lies with the party seeking condonation. Procedural delays and lack of diligence are insufficie....
The law of limitation is fundamental and must be strictly adhered to; mere procedural delays or bureaucratic inefficiencies do not justify the condonation of inordinate delays in filing appeals.
The principle that the law of limitation must be strictly adhered to, and that a party seeking condonation of delay must provide a satisfactory explanation that demonstrates diligence and bona fides.
The court ruled that an inordinate delay in filing an appeal requires a sufficient explanation, and negligence or lack of bona fides can lead to dismissal of the application for condonation.
The law of limitation is to be strictly enforced, and parties, including the government, must provide sufficient cause for any delay in filing appeals; negligence or lack of bona fides will not justi....
The court emphasized that delay in filing appeals must be condoned only when sufficient cause is shown, with strict adherence to the law of limitation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
