NAFR Digitally signed HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR INDRAJEET by INDRAJEET SAHU SAHU Date: 2026.02.13 19:16:02 +0530 WA No. 145 of 2026

1 - Ramnarayan Raje S/o Late Shri Bhaskar Prasad Raje Aged About 65 Years (Presently Now Aged About 71) R/o Sahdev Nagar, Near Lav Provision Store, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Co- Operative Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Registrar Co-Operative Societies, Chhattisgarh Block- 3, Second And Third Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3 - Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Bank Maryadit (Apex Bank), Sahkar Bhawan, Sector - 24, Plot No. 76, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Appellant : Shri Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate. For State : Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Deputy Advocate General.

For Respondent No.3 : Shri Jitendra Pali, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, CJ Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J

Order on Board

13.02.2026 Per, Ramesh Sinha, CJ .

1 Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties on the application for condonation of delay of 128 days in preferring the instant appeal.

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

30.07.2025, passed by learned Single Judge, in WPS No.551 of 2020.

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 after an inordinate delay of 128 days, she has not offered any plausible explanation or any cogent reason for delay in filing the writ appeal.

4 Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that the writ appeal is barred by delay and laches and further there is 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 128 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 law on the issue can be summarised to the effect that where a case has been presented in the court beyond limitation, the applicant 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 case a party is found to be negligent, or for want of bona fide on his part in the facts and circumstances of the case, or found to have not acted diligently or remained inactive, there cannot be a justified ground to condone the delay. No court could be justified in condoning such an inordinate delay by imposing any