RA-LP-98-2025 in LPA-539-2024 NIRMAL RANI AND OTHERS Versus State of Haryana and others

1. The date when the judgment is reserved 12.11.2025 2. The date when the judgment is pronounced 17.11.2025 3. The date when the judgment is uploaded on the website 18.11.2025

4. Whether only operative part of the judgment is pronounced or Full whether the full judgment is pronounced

5 The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full judgment, and Not reasons thereof applicable Present: Mr. Saurabh Mago, DAG, Haryana, for the applicants/respondents.

*****

CM-7049-2025 Application is allowed, as prayed for.

CM-7050-2025 This is an application for condonation of delay of 477 days in filing the review application being RA-LP-98-2025.

The review applicant has sought review of the judgment dated February 27, 2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, of which one of us (Lapita Banerji, J.) was a member. It has been pleaded in the instant application that vide opinion dated February 22, 2024, Law Officer concerned of the State opined that the same was not a fit case for filing Letters Patent Appeal before the Hon’ble High Court against the impugned judgment dated December 18, 2023 passed by learned Single Judge. The grant of sanction for filing of the appeal was approved by the Minister Incharge, Women and Child Development Department on April 29, 2024.

RA-LP-98-2025 in LPA-539-2024 The file was sent to the Superintendent on April 26, 2024. Administrative instructions were issued to defend the case before the trial.

Thereafter, the applicants sent the case to Legal Remembrancer (LR) seeking sanction for filing the LPA on May 17, 2024. When the filing of LPA was under process, the District Attorney for CS- Haryana opined that a review petition should be filed against the order February 27, 2024. Thereafter, on April 02, 2025, the file was marked again to Minister-In- charge, W & CD Department for grant of sanction for filing of review against the order dated February 27, 2024. On April 21, 2025, instructions were given to defend the case in the High Court. Thereafter, the LR issued necessary sanction for the same on May 01, 2025.

Learned counsel for the State submits that there was no negligence and laches on the part of the authorities for the delay and since there was good case on merits, delay should be liberally interpreted and condoned. Certain amount of latitude is to be shown to the instrumentalities of the State as it is public exchequer that suffers if the delay is not condoned.

This Court has heard learned counsel for the review applicants and perused the available pleadings on record.

Apart from cursory reference to the fact that the State was in the process of filing an appeal by the time the Co-ordinate Bench disposed of the appeal filed by the employees-writ petitioners and then was advised to file a review application from the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench on February 27, 2024, no other worthwhile explanation has been brought on record. The pleadings are totally silent on the steps taken by the State from RA-LP-98-2025 in LPA-539-2024 February 27, 2024 to April 02, 2025 and the reasons for inaction for more than a year. To the mind of this Court, nothing could be brought on record to show that delay on the part of review applicants was neither intentional nor willful. In fact, the conduct and omission on the part of review applicants leave a contrary impression to the mind of this Court when the Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly reiterated that all the government bodies, their agencies and instrumentalities need to be informed that unless they have a reasonable and acceptable explanation for the delay and there was bona fide effort, there was no need to accept the usual explanation of procedural red tapism.

Contrary to the submissions made by learned counsel for the review applicants, it has been held by the Apex Court that the government departments are under a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with