Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Bhaskar Ramchandra Joshi on 24 August, 2015
Writ Appeal No.290/2014
(State of M.P. & Ors. Vs. Bhaskar Ramchandra Joshi)
24/08/2015
Shri Praveen Newaskar, learned Govt. Advocate for
the appellants/State.
Shri S.G.Chitnis, learned counsel for the respondent.
In view of listing of the matter for hearing, I.A.No.5630/2015, respondent's application for early hearing, does not require any further consideration, hence, the same is disposed of.
Also heard on I.A.No.6572/2014, appellants' application for condoning the delay in filing this appeal as the same is filed barred by 383 days. I.A. is further supported by affidavit of OIC G.V.Mishra, Executive Engineer (PWD), Datia.
Without filing any reply, the averments of the I.A. have been seriously disputed by the respondent's counsel saying that whatsoever cause has been stated, the same could not be treated to be a sufficient cause as per requirement of Section 5 of the Limitation Act and prayer for dismissal of the IA is made.
Having heard the counsel, for the reasons stated in the I.A., we are satisfied that sufficient cause is made out to condone the delay, hence, by allowing the I.A., the same is condoned.
Heard on the question of admission.
2On behalf of the appellants/State, this intra- court appeal is preferred under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaya Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 being aggrieved by the order dated 11.7.2013 passed by the Writ Court in W.P.No.8445/11(S), whereby petition of the respondent filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for appropriate direction to the appellants to pay the amount of computation and gratuity with interest from the year 2000 has been allowed with cost of Rs.5,000/-.
Having heard the counsel, keeping in view the arguments advanced, we have carefully gone through the record of the Writ Court, including the impugned order, on such perusal, we have found that learned Writ Court has passed the impugned order taking into consideration the factual matrix of the matter in view of existing legal position. The approach as well as finding of learned Writ Court given in para 11 of the impugned order does not require any interference. As such, we have not found any illegality, irregularity, perversity or anything against the propriety of law in the impugned order which requires interference at this stage. Consequently, this appeal deserves to be and is hereby dismissed at the stage of motion hearing. However, considering the oral prayer of the State counsel, in the available circumstances, appellants/State authorities are extended further period of thirty days from today to pay the sum 3 of computation and gratuity as directed by the Writ Court in the impugned order. If the amount is not paid within aforesaid thirty days, then respondent shall be at liberty to prosecute Contempt Petition No.125/14 further.
In the aforesaid premises, the interim order passed on 10.11.14 has come to an end.
There shall be no order as to cost.
(U.C.Maheshwari) (Sushil Kumar Gupta)
Judge Judge
ms/-