IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2686 of

2025 In F/FIRST APPEAL/10091/2025 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No 

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

CHIEF DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER AND CIVIL SURGEON Versus LH OF DECD BHAGVANBHAI RAGHAVBHAI MER & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MS.HIMANI SHAH, AGP for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS.NISHTHA A.TRIVEDI for HARSH K RAVAL(9068) for the Respondent(s)

No. 1.2 MS KIRTI S PATHAK(9966) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,1.8 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER Date : 06/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1. The present application is filed for condonation of delay of 647 days in filing the appeal challenging the judgment dated 12.04.2023 passed by learned Employees Compensation Commissioner, Bhavnagar in Workman Compensation (Fatal) Application No.10 of 2011 whereby, the learned Commissioner has granted the compensation to the claimant of Rs.6,25,880/- with simple interest at the rate of 12% from 05.04.2011 with

50% penalty of Rs.3,12,940/- and other expenses.

2. Heard learned AGP Ms.Himani Shah and learned advocate Ms.Nishtha Trivedi for learned advocate Mr.Harsh Raval and learned advocate Ms.Kirta Pathak for the respondents.

2.1. Learned AGP Ms.Himani Shah has reiterated the grounds stated in the application and submitted that there was no mala fide intention in not preferring the appeal before this Court in time. It is submitted by learned AGP Ms.Shah that the appellant authority was under the impression that against the impugned judgment and order the writ petition would lie therefore file was processed in that way. Subsequently, on granting the sanction when the papers were sent to the office of the government pleader it was informed that instead of writ petition first appeal is to be filed. It is submitted that thereafter again file was moved to higher authorities for according the sanction for filing of first appeal and in that process delay was caused. It is submitted that file remained with the law officer for drafting around one year however subsequently, said law officer was moved from the office of the government pleader and file was allotted to the other law officer for drafting the appeal as well as application for condonation of delay. It is submitted by learned AGP Ms.Shah that as the applicant is having strong case of challenging the impugned judgment, therefore the application for condonation of delay be allowed and appeal be heard on merits.

2.2. Per contra, this application is opposed by learned advocate Ms.Nishtha Trivedi and learned advocate Ms.Kirta Pathak who submitted that no sufficient explanation offered in the application for condonation of delay. It is submitted by learned advocate that merely taking wrong decision for challenging the impugned judgment cannot be considered as reasonable and sufficient ground for condoning the delay of 647 days. It is also submitted by learned advocate that no document were placed on record to substantiate the ground stated in the application and in that background, the application deserves to be dismissed.

3. Having considered the submissions made by learned advocates for the respective parties this Court has referred the grounds stated in the application which is reproduced herienbelow:

3. It is most respectfully submitted that, on 18.04.2023, the certified copy of the judgment dated 12.04.2023 was received by the office of Medical Superintendent, Sir Takhtsinhji Hospital, Bhavnagar.

4. It is most respectfully submitted that on 19.04.2023, the opinion of District Government Pleader was sought and was received by the department on 24.04.2023.

5. It is on respectfully submitted that most 29.04.2023, the offi