The court emphasized that delay in filing appeals must be strictly justified, and lack of bona fides or negligence can prevent condonation of delay.

JUDGMENT :

Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, A.C.J.

The instant intra-court appeal, under clause 10 of the Letters Patent, is directed against the order/judgment dated 20.01.2023 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 3085 of 2020 by which the writ petition has been allowed.

I.A. No. 126 of 2023:

2. The instant appeal is admittedly barred by limitation since as per the office note dated 04.01.2024, there is delay of 316 days in preferring the appeal, therefore, an application being I.A. No. 126 of 2023 has been filed for condoning such delay.

3. This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been field after inordinate delay of 316 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.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that delay in preferring the appeal may be condoned by allowing the Interlocutory Application on the basis of grounds shown therein treating the same to be sufficient.

5. The grounds for condoning the delay in preferring the appeal, as has been mentioned in the interlocutory application is that after the order dated 20.01.2023 having being passed in W.P.(S) No. 3085 of 2020, the office of the appellant received on 17.07.2023 the communication of judgment passed by the learned Single Judge and the same was forwarded to the Legal Department which was received on 21.07.2023.

Thereafter, the Legal Department of appellant company contacted their Learned Advocate and requested him to forward the Certified Copy of Judgment passed by this Hon’ble Court. An application for obtaining Certified Copy of the order was made on 15.09.2023 and on 23.09.2023 the Office notified for submission of stamps and folios which were submitted on the same day and the Certified Copy was delivered on 30.09.2023.

Thereafter, the Certified Copy of the Judgment was forwarded to the Advocate for filing the appeal. However, as the records and files relating to WPS No. 3085 of 2020 was obtained from the learned counsel who conducted the writ proceedings and handed over the same to the newly appointed advocate.

Further, on research it has come to the notice that on 13.10.2023 the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs. Dukhni Bhuiya has decided a similar issue in Civil Appeal No. 6730 of 2023 wherein the Apex Court has allowed the appeal of the coal company and has directed that payment of monetary compensation be made only for a period of 3 years prior to the date of filing of the writ application.

In the light of the above legal position emerging, the appellants have taken a decision to immediately file an appeal on similar questions of fact and law.

Thereafter, the LPA along with the instant interlocutory application for condonation of delay has been filed.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants on delay condonation application and before considering the same, this Court, deems it fit and proper to refer certain legal proposition as has been propounded by the Hon’ble Apex Court with respect to the approach of the Court in condoning the inordinate delay.

7. There is no dispute about the fact that generally the lis is not to be rejected on the technical ground of limitation but certainly if the filing of appeal suffers from inordinate delay, then the duty of the Court is to consider the application to condone the delay before entering into the merit of the lis.

8. It requires to refer herein that the Law of limitation is enshrined in the legal maxim interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium (it is for the general welfare that a period be put to litigation). Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of the parties, rather the idea is that every legal remedy must be kept alive for a legislatively fixed period of time, as has been held in the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Brijesh Kumar & Ors. Vrs. Stat