Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 14]

Allahabad High Court

State Of U.P. & Others vs Kamlesh Singh Parihar & Others on 4 January, 2010

Author: C.K. Prasad

Bench: C.K. Prasad, Pankaj Mithal

   Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 108794 of 2004
                                In re :
          Special Appeal (Defective) No. 523 of 2004


Hon'ble C.K. Prasad, C.J.

Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal, J.

This application has been filed for condoning the delay in filing the appeal.

According to the Stamp Reporter, the appeal is barred by limitation by 184 days.

Various reasons, which prevented the applicants from filing the appeal within time, have been enumerated in the affidavit filed in support of the application.

We are satisfied that the same constitute sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the appeal.

Accordingly, delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

Application stands allowed.

Dt. 4.1.2010 S.S. (Pankaj Mithal, J.) (C.K. Prasad, C.J.) Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 523 of 2004 Petitioner :- State Of U.P. & Others Respondent :- Kamlesh Singh Parihar & Others Petitioner Counsel :- S.C. Hon'ble Chandramauli Kumar Prasad,Chief Justice Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.

Respondents-appellants, aggrieved by the order dated 28.10.2003 passed by learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 39481 of 2003, have preferred this appeal under Rule 5 Chapter VIII of the Allahabad High Court Rules.

The learned Single Judge had allowed the writ application in terms of the order dated 20.10.2003 passed by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 6319 (S/S) of 2003 (Chandra Kishore and others Vs. State of U.P. and others).

Mr. M.S. Pipersenia, appears on behalf of the appellants. An application seeking adjournment has been filed on behalf of the appellants.

As legislative changes have been brought in the Act, there is no point in adjourning the case.

It is common ground that in the light of the order of this Court Section 21-E has been inserted in U.P. Secondary Service Selection Board Act, 1982.

In view of the aforesaid legislative insertion, we are of the opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping this appeal pending.

It stands dismissed accordingly.

Dt. 4.1.2010.

S.S. (Pankaj Mithal, J.) (C.K. Prasad, C.J.)