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 in pursuing cases.

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 judgments of Hon’ble the Supreme Court. Reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bharat Coking Coal Limited and others Vs. Shyam Kishore Singh (2020) 3 SCC 411, wherein relying on the earlier authorities on the issue, it was observed:

"9. This Court has consistently held that the request for change of the date of birth in the service records at the fag end of service is not sustainable."

3. In view of above, it is submitted that the present appeal being meritorious, the delay in filing the appeal be condoned and the appeal be allowed.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the applicants/appellants in the present appeal cannot take shelter of Covid-19 pandemic as the period of filing the appeal expired much prior to the imposition of first lockdown in March, 2020. The impugned order was passed by learned Single Judge on July 30, 2019. A perusal of the aforesaid contents of the affidavit, filed in support of the application seeking condonation of delay, shows that the file was dealt with at different levels as if there is no period prescribed for filing the appeal and it would be filed by the State at its pleasure.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book.

6. Before the arguments of the parties could be heard and dealt with, there being huge delay in filing the present appeal the application seeking condonation of delay is required to be dealt with first.

7. The following table will show the dates and events after passing of the order by this Court and the action taken by the different departments of the State till such time the present appeal was filed: