Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Himachal Pradesh High Court

State Of H.P. & Others vs Ram Swaroop & Others on 15 May, 2019

Bench: Surya Kant, Ajay Mohan Goel

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                            CMP(M) No.146 of 2019




                                                               .
                                            and LPA No37 of 2019





                                            Decided on: 15.05.2019





          State of H.P. & others                           ...Appellants.
                                   Versus

          Ram Swaroop & others                             ....Respondents.
    Coram




    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant, Chief Justice
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge
    Whether approved for reporting?
    For the appellants:      Mr.Ashwani Sharma, Additional Advocate
                    r        General.

    For the respondents:     Mr.Vikrant Thakur, Advocate.

    Surya Kant, Chief Justice (Oral)

Service of respondents No.2 and 3 is dispensed with, being proforma respondents.

2. This intra Court appeal assails judgment dated 21st March, 2017, whereby learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent and has directed the appellants to release Grant-in-aid in his favour from the date when the Grant-

in-aid Rules were notified and till the time the respondent discharged his duties as O.T. (Shastri).

3. There is no quarrel on facts that the respondent was appointed as O.T. (Shastri) on 2.6.2003 in Bilasa Senior Secondary School, Bilaspur which received more than 95% grant-

in-aid from the State Government. He, however, was denied the benefit of Grant-in-aid Scheme on the plea that he was appointed .

by the School Management Committee without following due procedure and that the appointment was made without wide publicity of the post. The objection has been repelled by the learned Single Judge after taking notice of the fact that no such condition was contemplated under the Scheme and that the

4. to respondent was working for more than a decade.

The instant appeal is accompanied with CMP(M) No.146 of 2019, seeking condonation of delay of 1 year, 10 months and 24 days in filing the appeal. It may be noticed that the time limit to file the Letters Patent Appeal is 30 days only. It is averred in the application that the certified copy of the order pronounced by the learned Single Judge on 21st March, 2017 was delivered on 18th August, 2017 and that the matter remained pending before the Law Department seeking opinion whether or not the appeal should be filed.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, has pointed out that the appellant applied for the certified copy on 9th August, 2017 i.e. almost after 5 months of the pronouncement of the judgment and by that time the time limit to file the appeal had already expired. There is no whisper in the ::: Downloaded on - 15/05/2019 21:59:25 :::HCHP 3 application as to why the Law Department kept on sitting over the file and did not give timely opinion. The application thus is bereft .

of any reasons much less justifiable explanation for the inordinate delay. The application is accordingly dismissed and so would be the fate of accompanying appeal. Even on merits, as observed earlier, no case for interference in appeal is made out.

6. In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed alongwith pending application(s), if any.

( Surya Kant ), Chief Justice ( Ajay Mohan Goel ), Judge May 15, 2019 ( vt ) ::: Downloaded on - 15/05/2019 21:59:25 :::HCHP