IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 614 of

2026 In F/FIRST APPEAL/34883/2025 With R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 615 of 2026 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 34921 of 2025 With R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 625 of 2026 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 34911 of 2025 With R/CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 626 of 2026 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 34912 of 2025 ==========================================================

MAHESHKUMAR AMRUTLAL PANCHIWALA Versus ADJUDICATION OFFICER AND RESIDENCE ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR, PALANPUR BANASKANTHA & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR NIRAV K PADHIYAR(5678) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 614 of 2026 & 625 of 2026 MS. HIMANI SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 615 of 2026 & 626 of 2026 MR. BHAVESH DESAI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER Date : 12/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. The present application has been filed for condonation of delay of 899 days in filing the first appeal. Learned advocate Mr. Nirav Padhiyar has reiterated the grounds stated in the application and submitted that the applicant was not aware of the order passed by the Authority imposing a cost of Rs. 1,00,000/-. However, in July 2025, the Office of Respondent No.2 informed the applicant about the order passed by the learned Appellate Authority and directed the applicant to deposit the said cost. Thereafter, on applying for a certified copy, the applicant approached the learned Advocate for filing the appeal, and in the course of such proceedings, a delay of 899 days occurred. It is, therefore, prayed that the application be allowed and the delay of 899 days be condoned.

3. This application is opposed by the learned AGP.

4. This Court has perused the averments made in the application, which are reproduced herein below:-

“2. That the order has been pronounced on 31.03.2023 by the Ld. Food Safety Appellate Tribunal. That after pronouncing the judgment the office of the tribunal had forwarded the order to the applicant's firm at the relevant time but the applicant did not served the order of the tribunal by the concerned postman because the factory of the applicant is situated other side of the railway crossing and the Deesa City post office believing that this area is not come under their control or jurisdiction and therefore the postman did not served the order of the side of the tribunal. The applicant submits that thereafter the postal authority sends back Tribunal at the order of the Ld. Appellate Gandhinagar and they have also did not inform the applicant about the same. The applicant further submits that in month July, 2025 the office of the respondent no.2 informed about the order passed by the Ld. Appellate Tribunal and asked them to deposit the cost amount and only that time the applicant came to know about the order passed by the Ld. Food Safety Appellate Tribunal.

3. That, thereafter the applicant on 07.07.2025 went at Tribunal and to the Gandhinagar collected the order dated 31.03.2023 passed by the Ld. Appellate Tribunal. The applicant submits that thereafter the applicant contacted an advocate who appear in his case and he advised the applicant to challenge the said order in the Hon'ble High court and therefore he approached Ld. Advocate for to take advice in month of august an advocate at Ahmedabad advise him to provide all the relevant papers of the case and thereafter the applicant applied for the certified papers of the case to the respondent No.2 office on 29.08.2025 and the applicant collected the certified copy of the papers of the case on 10.09.2020 and thereafter in month of October 2025 the applicant again contacted the advocate at Ahmedabad and to arrangement appeal the the and of money for preferring time has been consume