Appeal dismissed for being without plausible ground
Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, Feb 25: In a bizarre case, a Government department knocked the doors of the Division Bench of the J&K and Ladakh High Court against the judgment of Single Bench after gargantuan delay of 1954 days. However, the department failed to get any reprieve from the Division Bench comprising Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta as there was no cogent and plausible ground for seeking condonation of delay. Rather, DB passed strictures against the department for dilly-dallying tactics in implementation of judgment of Single Bench.
The Single Bench while dealing with a matter relating to promotion vide judgment dated August 25, 2017 had granted some relief to the petitioner—Bal Krishan Thusoo. However, several years after the judgment of Single Bench, the Home Department filed Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) along with application seeking condonation of delay last year.
When the application seeking condonation of delay of 1954 days came up for hearing few days back before the Division Bench of J&K and Ladakh High Court comprising Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta, Senior Additional Advocate General Monika Kohli appearing for the Home Department submitted that the judgment against which the appeal is sought to be filed was passed on 25.08.2017.
On 14.11.2017, the department received the court order and the file was processed on 21.12.2017 and a proposal for obtaining sanction was sent to the Finance Department. On 23.05.2018, the Finance Department advised the Law Department to implement the orders of the court.
Rather, on 20.02.2020, the Law Department accorded sanction to file the appeal and finally, the appeal was filed on 02.03.2023. Hence, there was delay of 1954 days in filing the appeal. “The delay caused on the part of the State in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor willful”, she added.
After hearing Senior AAG and perusal of the application, the DB observed, “though the State has given details for the delay yet the perusal of the same would show that it has not appreciated the matter in its correct perspective. The Law Department accorded sanction to file the appeal on 20.02.2020. After more than three years, the appeal was filed on 02.03.2023”.
“The State has put the matter on hold for around five years for reasons that the delay occurred due to inter and intra-departmental communications. It is not a case where the judgment impugned has been passed ex parte and the State was oblivious of the passing of the judgment”, the DB said, adding “the judgment had been passed on 25.08.2017 and the State was very well represented by its Senior AAG. No explanation has been tendered in the application which could justify the time which the applicants took in filing the appeal so belatedly except the reiteration of inter-departmental communications and COVID-19 pandemic period”.
Pointing towards the judgments of the Supreme Court, the DB said, “pellucidly clear are the dilly-dallying tactics of the State in the matter. Despite the nod by the Law Department as well as the Finance Department in prior point of time, the concerned department has contrived ways for eschewing implementation of the judgment, on one pretext or the other, as if the judgment was in the teeth of law”.
“Had that been the case, the State should have acted promptly. Also, the huge part of the delay is blithely explained in the application which cannot be brushed aside by us. It is clear case where we can draw an inference that the State has proceeded in the matter nonchalantly”, the DB remarked.
“We hold that applicants have failed to plausibly show before us sufficient cause which prevented them to file the appeal in time. The gargantuan delay of 1954 days in filing the appeal is not satisfactorily explained which could dissuade us from not allowing the application”, the DB said.
Accordingly, the application seeking condonation of delay was dismissed and resultantly LPA also.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
