2026:CGHC:12379-DB Digitally signed by ANURADHA NAFR ANURADHA TIWARI TIWARI Date:

2026.03.16

17:47:52 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR +0530 WA No. 220 of 2026

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur C.G.

2 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, General Administration Department, Raipur, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur C.G.

3 - Collector, Janjgir District Janjgir Champa C.G.

... Appellants versus

1 - Kuldeep Singh Thakur S/o. Late Shri Santosh Singh Thakur, Aged About 27 Years R/o. Purana Chandaniya Para, Ward No. 17, Parshuram Marg, District Janjgir Champa C.G.

2 - Managing Director, Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (Wrongly Typed As Sports And Youth Welfare Department (Transport Section) Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel International Hockey Stadium), Chhattisgarh Rajya Kaushal Vikas Pradhikaran Bhawan, Second Floor, Old Phq Campus, Near Raj Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Janjgir District Janjgir Champa C.G.

... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Appellants : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Additional Advocate General For Respondent No.1 : Mo. Naqeeb, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

16.03.2026

1. Heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State/appellants on I.A. No.02, which is an application for condonation of delay of 230 days in preferring the present writ appeal.

2. Mr. Thakur submits that the present writ appeal has been preferred against the order dated 05.05.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 995/2020; however, there has occurred a delay of 230 days in filing the same. It is submitted that the delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate but has occurred due to unavoidable administrative and procedural formalities within the State machinery. It is further submitted that after the impugned order was passed, the concerned department sought legal opinion from the Office of the Advocate General, Chhattisgarh. Upon receipt of the opinion recommending filing of the appeal, the matter was processed through the competent authorities for obtaining necessary sanction from the Law and Legislative Affairs Department. After completion of the said procedural formalities, sanction for filing the appeal was granted on 24.12.2025 and thereafter the Officer-in-Charge was appointed on 02.01.2026, pursuant to which the present writ appeal has been drafted and filed.

3. Learned counsel further submits that the State is an impersonal machinery functioning through several departments and levels of decision- making and, therefore, some amount of delay in obtaining approvals and sanctions is inevitable. It is contended that the delay has occurred on account of bona fide administrative procedures and not due to any negligence or lack of diligence on the part of the appellants. It is lastly submitted that the appellants have a strong case on merits and substantial questions arise for consideration in the accompanying writ appeal. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Nagaland v. Lipok Ao, (2005) 3 SCC 372, wherein it has been held that a pragmatic and justice- oriented approach should be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay filed by the State. Therefore, it is prayed that the delay in filing the present writ appeal may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 opposes the prayer for condonation of delay and submits that the appellants have failed to show any sufficient cause for the inordinate delay in filing the present writ appeal. It is contended that the explanation offered by the State rega