Administrative delay caused by routine bureaucratic file movement does not constitute 'sufficient cause' to condone inordinate filing delays. Government agencies are governed by the same laws of limitation as other litigants and must demonstrate due diligence and bona fide conduct to excuse failure to file appeals within the statutory period.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant intra-court appeal is under Clause-10 of Letters Patent directed against the order/judgment dated 08.01.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.6725 of 2019, whereby and whereunder, while disposing of the writ petition, direction has been given upon the respondent no.3 to extend the benefits of 5^th pay revision to the original petitioner no.1 and the petitioner nos.2 to 7 in the light of recommendation made by the Ranchi University.

I.A.No.6708 of 2025

2. The instant appeal is barred by inordinate delay of 467 days, therefore, an application for condoning the aforesaid delay has been filed being I.A.No.6708 of 2025.

3. This Court, after taking into consideration the fact that the instant intra-court appeal has been field after inordinate delay of 467 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. The ground for condonation of delay has been taken, as per the pleading made in the instant interlocutory application that the impugned order was pronounced on 08.01.2024 and the same after coming to the knowledge of the appellant-State, the file was put before the office of the appellant-State for taking further steps in the matter.

5. The file has been forwarded to the authority concerned and on 25.06.2024, the concerned authority has endorsed the file to the Deputy Director with a noting that the department may consider to file Letters Patent Appeal. Thereafter, on 01.07.2024, the Under Secretary has endorsed the file to the Legal retainer to draft the L.P.A.

6. On 09.09.2024, the Deputy Director has endorsed the file to the under Secretary with a noting that the file can be further endorsed to the learned Advocate General for further opinion. On 18.09.2024, the under Secretary has endorsed the file to the Secretary with a noting that the Ground of Appeal was prepared by the Legal Retainer and further, the file can be endorsed to the learned Advocate General. On 23.09.2024, the Secretary has endorsed the file to the learned Advocate General. In pursuant thereto, the learned Advocate General has opined to prefer L.P.A.through one Law Officer.

7. On 08.10.2024, the file was forwarded to the Deputy Director with a noting that the approval to authorized the Deputy Director for filing L.P.A. may be obtained which was further forwarded to the under Secretary for the same purpose on 18.10.2024.

8. On 22.10.2024, the under Secretary has endorsed the file to the Secretary for further approval, upon which, the Secretary has authorized the Deputy Director to prefer L.P.A.

9. Thereafter, the file was forwarded to the concerned Law Officer for preparing the draft of Letters Patent Appeal who has prepared the draft and return the file to the Department for getting approval, which according to the appellants is not intentional rather on account of procedural delay.

10. Learned Sr. S.C.-I appearing for the State-appellants, therefore, has prayed to condone the delay and has submitted that the reasons assigned in the instant interlocutory application are sufficient to condone the delay.

11. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties 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 b