Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, CJ, DEEPAK ROSHAN
State of Jharkhand – Appellant
Versus
Ram Binay Mishra S/o Late Ram Chandra Mishra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ramachandra Rao, C.J.
I.A. No. 686 of 2025 in LPA No. 731 of 2023.
1. This application is filed to condone the delay of 1482 days in filing this Letters Patent Appeal challenging the judgment passed on 04.12.2017 by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 6702 of 2017.
2. In the impugned order, the learned Single Judge had disposed of the said Writ petition in terms of the order dated 21.04.2017 in W.P.(S) No. 4284 of 2016.
3. In the application filed seeking condonation of delay, it is stated that the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 4284 of 2016 was challenged in L.P.A. No. 35 of 2018 and it was allowed on 21.02.2022 and the matter was remanded to the Single Judge for fresh adjudication after giving opportunity to the respondents in the writ petition. It is further stated that post remand, the W.P.(S) 4284 of 2016 was again allowed on 02.05.2023 and the said order was challenged in L.P.A. No. 629 of 2023 which is still pending.
4. It is contended that the respondents/writ petitioners had filed Cont. Case (Civil) No. 151 of 2018 which was pending and after getting communication from the State Counsel regarding order passed in the Contempt Case, the
The court established that a delay of 1482 days in filing a Letters Patent Appeal is unreasonable without sufficient cause, highlighting the necessity for timely challenges in legal proceedings.
Government departments must adhere to limitation periods; bureaucratic delays do not justify condonation of significant delays in legal proceedings.
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 emphasized that delays in filing appeals must be satisfactorily explained, and inaction prior to the pandemic does not qualify for condonation under the Limitation Act.
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.
Delay in filing a petition cannot be condoned without plausible justification, regardless of the party's status, emphasizing adherence to the law of limitation.
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 underscored that delays due to administrative negligence cannot justify condonation in legal proceedings, particularly for state agencies, emphasizing the importance of diligence in adherin....
The court emphasized the necessity of diligence in filing appeals and rejected bureaucratic inefficiency as a valid excuse for delay in legal proceedings.
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
