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.

ORDER :

Rajesh Bindal, CJ.

1. The present intra court appeal has been filed against the order dated February 5, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge by which the writ petition was allowed.

2. The appeal is accompanied by an application seeking condonation of delay. The period of delay has not been mentioned in the application, however, as calculated by the Registry, the period is 287 days.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant/appellant submitted that after the copy of the order was received, the file had to be dealt with at number of stages before the final decision is taken and the appeal was filed. The Government Machinery being impersonal, the delay has occurred. The case otherwise is quite meritorious and the order passed by the learned Single Judge deserves to be set aside.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 submitted that there is hardly any explanation given for seeking the condonation of delay. Similar grounds have already been discarded by the Hon'ble Court Supreme Court in the case of Postmaster General and Others Vs. Living Media India Limited and Another, (2012) 3 SCC 563. Hence, condonation of delay on such grounds is not permissible. He also referred to an order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh and Others Vs. Bherulal (2020) 10 SCC 654 whereby relying on the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Postmaster General and other's case (supra), while dismissing the application seeking condonation of delay, even cost was imposed.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application seeking condonation of delay.

6. In the case in hand, the order passed by the learned Single Judge is dated 05 February, 2018. A period of 30 days has been provided for filing a Special Appeal against the order passed by the learned Single Bench, in case any of the party is aggrieved. Casualness on the part of the applicant/appellant is apparent as even the application for supply of certified copy of the order was filed on 28.04.2018 i.e. after expiry of period of limitation to file appeal and the same was not pursued thereafter as it remained pending till December, 2018.

7. If the facts stated in the affidavit filed in support of the application seeking condonation of delay are considered, in paragraph no. 2 thereof, it is stated that after receipt of the copy of the order dated 05.02.2018, as impugned in the present appeal, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow vide letter dated 27.02.2018 requested the learned Chief Standing Counsel for applying for the certified copy thereof. But the fact as is evident from the certified copy placed on record is that it was applied on 28.04.2018 i.e. more than two months after the order was passed. Subsequent thereto, vide letter dated 14.03.2018, learned Chief Standing Counsel was requested for his legal opinion on the matter.

8. The fact remains that the copy of the order dated 05.02.2018 was with the Department and a request was made to the learned Chief Standing Counsel for applying for the certified copy thereof, however, still in that letter, request was not made for seeking opinion of the learned Chief Standing Counsel. The communication was made two weeks' thereafter. Reminders were sent to the office of the Chief Standing Counsel on 04.04.2018, 20.04.2018, 10.05.2018, 11.06.2018 and 13.07.2018. Meaning thereby for a period of four months, the matter remained pending with the office of Chief Standing Counsel. Thereafter opinion was given for filing a Special Leave to Appeal against the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

9. On 27.04.2018, Senior Superintendent of Police, Lucknow requested learned Chief Standing Counsel to re-examine the legal opinion rendered on 06.08.2018. The learned Chief Standing Counsel opined that the case is fit for filing the Special Appeal. Thereafter vide letter dated 11.08.2018, the matter was referred to the Government for permission to file appeal. Reminder was sent on