Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, C.J., RAJESH SHANKAR
State of Jharkhand – Appellant
Versus
Sidharth Shankar Chaudhary, S/o. Late Arbind Chaudhary – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The instant interlocutory application is filed under Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT , 1963 by the applicants to condone the delay of 231 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal challenging the judgment dt.22.3.2024 of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P.(S) No. 6891 of2017.
2. In the application filed seeking condonation of delay, it is stated that through a letter dt. 4.4.2024 received from the office of the learned Advocate General, it was informed that the writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge on 22.3.2024; till then order of the learned Single Judge was not uploaded on the website of the High Court; on 9.4.2024, proposal was mooted for taking appropriate decision and after going through various departmental channels, on 30.4.2024 the Departmental Secretary sent the file to the office of the Advocate General for obtaining necessary opinion.
3. It is then stated that on 3.5.2024, the Advocate General opined that the L.P.A. in the present case be preferred and returned the file. Thereafter the file was sent to the departmental retainer for preparing statement of facts and also grounds of appeal and then it was placed befo
The court ruled that governmental entities must demonstrate diligence in filing appeals, and bureaucratic delays do not suffice as grounds for condonation of delay under the Limitation Act.
The court emphasized the necessity of diligence in filing appeals and rejected bureaucratic inefficiency as a valid excuse for delay in legal proceedings.
The court ruled that governmental entities must adhere to the same limitation periods as private litigants and cannot mechanically condone delays without sufficient cause.
Both public entities and individuals are strictly bound by the law of limitation, and dilatory conduct without sufficient reason does not merit condonation of delay 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 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 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.
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.
The law of limitation applies universally, and bureaucratic delays do not constitute sufficient cause for condoning inordinate delays in filing appeals.
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
