Back
RAJESH BINDAL, J. J. MUNIR
State of Uttar Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Sita Ram – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present intra-Court appeal has been filed by the State impugning the order dated July 30, 2019. Along with the appeal, an application has been filed seeking condonation of delay in filing thereof. The period for which the delay is sought to be condoned is not mentioned in the application. However, as calculated by the Registry, it comes to 948 days, i.e., more than two years and seven months.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants/appellants, while trying to make out a case for condonation of huge delay of more than two years and seven months in filing the appeal, referred to the affidavit filed in support of the application seeking condonation of delay. He submitted that it was on account of bureaucratic set up and impersonal machinery which resulted in delay in filing the present appeal. One of the reasons is also Covid-19 pandemic. The submission is that the case otherwise is meritorious. The learned Single Judge has allowed the prayer for change of date of birth at the fag end of the career of the respondent-employee which is totally in contravention of judgment
The main legal point established in the judgment is that condonation of delay should not be used as an anticipated benefit for government departments, and there is a need for diligence and commitment....
The court emphasized the accountability of State-Authorities for inaction and held that the impersonal machinery of the government cannot be used as a ground for condonation of delay.
Administrative lethargy and bureaucratic delays do not constitute sufficient cause for condoning inordinate delays by state in filing appeals; bona fides and vigilance required.
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
