2026:CGHC:5628-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 27 of 2026

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh General Administration Department, Mantralaya, MANPREET KAUR Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District Raipur, Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.02.02 Chhattisgarh

16:19:48 +0530

2 - The Principal Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh Finance Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh., District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s)

versus

1 - Chhattisgarh Shaskiya Mahavidyalayin Pensioners Sangh, A Registered Society Duly Registered By Registrar Of Societies, Chhattisgarh, Bearing Registration No. 3011, Having Its Office At Flat N. 1/g Nathani Apartments, New Shanti Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Shri Vijay Chakravarty, S/o Late Suresh Chandra Chakravarty, Aged About 77 Years, R/o Flat No. 1/g, Nathani Apartments, New Shanti Nagar, Raipur 492007 Chhattisgarh., District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2 - State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal Secretary, Government Of Madhya Pradesh Finance Department, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh), District Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh

3 - Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Personnel, Pg And Pension Department Of Pensions And Pensioners Welfare, New Delhi., District New Delhi, Delhi ... Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Prasun Kumar Bhaduri, Dy. A.G.

For Respondent(s) : Ms. Shweta Rai, Advocate on behalf of Mr.

Ramakant Mishra, DSGI Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

02.02.2026

1. Heard Mr. Prasun Kumar Bhaduri, learned Deputy Advocate General for the appellant/State on I.A. No.02 of 2025, which is an application for condonation of delay. Also heard Ms. Shweta Rai, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. Ramakant Mishra, learned DSGI for respective respondents.

2. Learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State/appellant submits that the learned Single Judge on 19.02.2025 passed the impugned order. Thereafter, the Additional Secretary, Department of Finance had sought an opinion from the Office of the Advocate General vide letter dated 09.10.2025. Upon which the Office of the Advocate General vide its letter dated 10.10.2025 has accorded opinion for filing appeal and thereafter OIC is appointed vide letter dated 15.10.2025 and the present appeal is being drafted and filed before this Hon'ble Court.

3. It has been contended that the State, after obtaining necessary documents and information with respect to the case, however, some delay was occurred due to fulfillment of various departmental formalities and working of the Government machinery because the State Government is a multi functioning body, hence, at times the fulfillment of departmental formalities takes unexpected long time. Therefore, in some cases the State is prevented from filing the case within the prescribed period of limitation, which is bonafide and not deliberate. The instant appeal is, therefore, being filed after a delay of 208 days from the prescribed period of limitation. Reliance has been placed upon the judgment rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Nagaland Vs. LipokAo [(2005) 3 SCC Page 372], to buttress his submissions. As such, the learned State counsel prays that the delay of 208 days in preferring the petition may be condoned.

4. The question for determination before this Court is whether the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1908 (i.e. Act 9 of 1908 i.e. the old Limitation Act) would apply to an application for condonation of delay.

5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Postmaster General and others v. Living Media India Limited and another, (2012) 3 SCC 563, has dealt with the limitation issue and held as under:-

“27. It is not in dispute that the person(s) concerned were well aware or conversant with the issues involved including the prescribed period o