Back
RAMESH SINHA, SUBHASH VIDYARTHI
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
C/M, Seth Jaipuriya School – Respondent
JUDGMENT
C.M. Application No.1 of 2023 (Application for Condonation of Delay)
Heard Shri Amitabh Kumar Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-appellant and Shri Prashant Chandra, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. By means of the instant application, the appellant- State of U.P. is seeking condonation of delay of 65 days in filing the special appeal.
3. In the affidavit filed in support of the application filed for condonation of delay, it has been stated that by means of the order dated 27.09.2022 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ C No.522 of 2022, the appellants were directed to grant No-Objection Certificate for admission sought by the respondent within a period of two months. A copy of the judgment and order dated 27.09.2022 passed in Writ-C No.522 of 2022 was served by Manager of the respondent/ School, along with its representation dated 12.10.2022. On 05.11.2022, a meeting of the designated Regional Committee was held and after due deliberation, it was decided to file a special appeal challenging the judgment and order dated 27.09.2022. On 05.11.2022 itself, a letter was sent to the State Gove
The court emphasized the term 'sufficient cause' as a necessary condition for the extension of the prescribed period under the Limitation Act, highlighting the importance of providing adequate reason....
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.
The court endorsed a liberal approach to condoning delays in appeals, emphasizing substantial justice over technicality, while holding the State to the same standards as other litigants.
Government bodies must provide reasonable explanations for delays in filing appeals, as the law of limitation applies equally to all litigants, including the State.
Government litigation must adhere to the same standards for condonation of delay as private parties, with negligence and casual inaction being inadequate justifications.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State should not be placed at a different footing from private individuals in the matter of condonation of delay.
The State must provide satisfactory reasons for delay in filing petitions; bureaucratic inefficiency is no excuse. Condonation of delay should not undermine the principles of timely justice.
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
