2026:CGHC:2374-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 10 of 2026

1 - Smt. Rajeshwari Dahire W/o Shri Jwala Prasad Dahire, D/o Late Chait Ram Kurre, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Village Sawantpur, Police Station Lalpur, Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2 - The Director, Directorate, Tribal Welfare Department Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3 - The Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4 - The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

5 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Education Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

6 - The Director, Directorate, Department of Public Education, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh D M i O gi H ta A ll M y M sig E n D ed by 7 - The District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh AADIL KHAN Date: 2026.01.16 18:27:20 +0530 ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System)

For Appellant : Mr. Parasmani Shriwas, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shr i Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri R avindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J .

15/01/2026

1. Heard Mr. Parasmani Shriwas, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Govt. Advocate, appearing for respondents/State on I.A. No.01, which is an application for condonation of delay of 39 days in preferring the instant appeal.

2. The appellant has filed this writ appeal against an order dated

08.09.2025, passed by learned Single Judge, in WPS No. 2723 of 2021 (Smt. Rajeshwari Dahire v. State of Chhattisgarh and others), by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner.

3. On a pointed query being made to the learned counsel for the appellant as to why he has approached this Court against the impugned order dated 08.09.2025, after an inordinate delay of 39 days, he has not offered any plausible explanation or any cogent reason for delay in filing the writ appeal.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the writ appeal is barred by delay and laches and further there no cogent reason or explanation has been given in the delay and laches application filed for condonation of delay. Hence, the appeal is not liable to be entertained.

5. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties as also perused the application for condonation of delay in preferring the instant writ appeal.

6. The primary question that arises for consideration before this Court is whether the delay of about 39 days in preferring the present writ appeal deserves to be condoned or not.

7. Recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of “State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramkumar Choudhary” 2024 INSC 932, while considering the delay, issued some directions and observed as follows:-

“5. The legal position is that where a case has been presented in the Court beyond limitation, the petitioner has to explain the Court as to what was the "sufficient cause" which means an adequate and enough reason which prevented him to approach the Court within limitation. In Majji Sannemma v. Reddy Sridevi, 2021 SCC Online SC 1260, it was held by this Court that even though limitation may harshly affect the rights of a party, it has to be applied with all its rigour when prescribed by statute. A reference was also made to the decision of this Court in Ajay Dabra v. Pyare Ram, 2023 SCC Online 92 wherein, it was held as follows:

"13. This Court in the case of Basawaraj v. Special Land Acquisition Officer [(2013) 14 SCC 81] while rejecting an application for condonation of delay for lack of sufficient cause has concluded in Paragraph 15 as follows: “15. The l