Advocates:
['RANJIT S JAMWAL', 'DY AG', '', 'RAVINDER GUPTA', 'AAG', 'ASHOK MISRA']

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

CONC No. 27/2016

State of J&K and others

…..Petitioner/Appellant(s)

Through: Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG

Vs.

Suresh Kumar and others

.…. Respondent(s)

Through: Mr. Ashok Misra, Advocate

Coram:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TASHI RABSTAN, JUDGE

ORDER

1.

This application for condonation of delay of 995 days in filing the

appeal against the judgment and decree dated 03.01.2013 passed by the 2^nd

Additional District Judge, Jammu in file No. 65/Civil titled <Suresh Kumar &

ors. vs. State & ors= has been filed on 04.03.2016, precisely, on the ground that

the matter after its examination at its different with reference to the record was

finally referred to the Law Department and the law department after examining

the judgment and decree advised the appellants to file civil first miscellaneous

appeal vide its communication dated 25.02.2016, i.e., after a lapse of three

years. In the present case the applicant has not even mentioned the details,

especially, on what date and before which authority, the file was pending.

2.

Law is well settled with regard to filing the application for

condonation of delay along with the appeal where the applicant is State

Government.

The

Hon’ble

Supreme

Court in

SLP

(Civil)

Diary

No(s).19846/2020 titled as Union of India Vs. Central Tibetan Schools

40

2 CONC No. 27/2016

Admin & Ors., decided on 04.02.2021 while dismissing it on account of delay

observed as under:-

<We have repeatedly being counselling through

our orders various Government departments,

State Governments and other public authorities

that they must learn to file appeals in time and set

their house in order so far as the legal department

is concerned, more so as technology assists them.

This appears to be falling on deaf ears despite

costs having been imposed in number of matters

with the direction to recover it from the officers

responsible for the delay as we are of the view

that these officers must be made accountable. It

has not had any salutary effect and that the

present matter should have been brought up,

really takes the cake!

The aforesaid itself shows the casual

manner in which the petitioner has approached

this Court without any cogent or plausible ground

for condonation of delay. In fact, other than the

lethargy and incompetence of the petitioner, there

is nothing which has been put on record. We have

repeatedly discouraged State Governments and

public authorities in adopting an approach that

they can walk in to the Supreme Court as and

when they please ignoring the period of limitation

prescribed by the Statutes, as if the Limitation

statute does not apply to them. In this behalf,

suffice to refer to our judgment in the State of

Madhya Pradesh & Ors. v. Bheru Lal [SLP [C]

Diary No.9217/2020 decided on 15.10.2020] and

The State of Odisha & Ors. v. Sunanda

2 CONC No. 27/2016

Mahakuda [SLP[C] Diary No.22605/2020

decided on 11.01.2021]….=

3.

For the foregoing reasons, I do not find any merit in the

application and as such the application seeking condonation of delay deserves

to be rejected and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Resultantly, in light of

dismissal of condonation of delay application, the accompanied civil first

appeal shall also stand dismissed, being time barred.

(Tashi Rabstan)

Judge

JAMMU

16.09.2021

Pawan Angotra

PAWAN ANGOTRA

2021.09.18 13:32

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document