Gujarat High Court
Banaskantha District Panchayat ... vs Ashishkumar Bhaishankar Dave on 19 January, 2026
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/6225/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
6225 of 2025
In F/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION/30784/2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION/13139/2022
=====================================================
BANASKANTHA DISTRICT PANCHAYAT THROUGH DISTRICT
DEVELOPMENT OFFICER MAHESHKUMAR JAYANTILAL DAVE
Versus
ASHISHKUMAR BHAISHANKAR DAVE & ORS.
=====================================================
Appearance:
MR RB THAKOR(6743) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
DIPAK N JOSHI(1689) for the Respondent(s) No.
1,2,3,4,5
MR AKASH GUPTA ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 6,7,8
=====================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 19/01/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. R. B. Thakor appearing for the applicant-original petitioner No. 3, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Akash Gupta appearing for the respondent-State and its authorities, and learned advocate Mr. Dipak Joshi appearing for the original respondent Nos. 1 to 5.
2. By way of this application for condonation of delay, the applicant has prayed for condonation Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by PALLAVI PRABHUDAS PANCHAL(HC01403) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 21:46:02 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/6225/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2026 undefined of a delay of 1047 days incurred in filing the review application.
3. In the entire application for condonation of delay, the applicant has stated as under:
"1. The applicants most respectfully crave leave to prefer present Miscellaneous Civil Application for review of the order dated 19.10.2022 passed in Special Civil Application No.13139 of 2021 filed against the present applicant by Respondent No.1 to 5, directing the applicant and respondent authorities to grant a benefit of regularization in service as Multi- Purpose Health Worker (Male) by way of counting the service rendered on contractual basis for all the purposes like seniority, pay, leave and consequential benefits to the private respondents, the applicant herein has preferred review application before the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat.
2. That in the SCA No. 13139 of 2022 notice was issued by the Hon'ble Court on 15.07.2022. That said notice was not brought on notice to the applicant herein so nobody appeared for the District Panchayat and matter was came to be allowed with group of matters by judgement dated 19.10.2022. Therefore, the in the absence of the appearance made on behalf of the applicant herein true facts could not be brought on record.
3. That about order passed in SCA was came to the notice to the applicant when the follow-up was taken in the above matter. Therefore, show cause notice was issued to the responsible person for not placing the Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by PALLAVI PRABHUDAS PANCHAL(HC01403) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 21:46:02 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/6225/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2026 undefined orders passed in this matter.
4. That thereafter immediately the ammeters papers were forwarded to the panel advocate Shri Hemant Munshaw for preferring an LPA against the order passed is SCA.
5. That in civil application for condonation of delay in LPA as per submission of advocate the Hon'ble High Court was not pleased to condone the delay therefore the same was withdrawn with liberty to file review application in SCA No. 13139 of 2022.
6. That in these processes delay of 1047 days occurred in filing review application. The petitioner has good case on merit and issued involved in the matter is squarely covered by the LPAs preferred in identical matters, therefore delay occurred in preferring review application is required to be condoned.
7. The applicant most humbly respectfully submits that the applicant have a strong prima facie case and the balance of convenience is also in favour of the applicant and therefore, the delay of 1047 occurred in filing the said application as prayed for may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice. If the said delay is not condoned as prayed for than, the applicant will suffer an irreparable loss. So, the said delay may be condoned in the interest of justice.
8. The applicant craves leave of this Hon'ble Court to add, amend, alter, vary, rescind or delete any of the paragraphs mentioned in this application, as and when the need to that effect so arises."Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by PALLAVI PRABHUDAS PANCHAL(HC01403) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 21:46:02 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/6225/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2026 undefined
4. The Court has noted the said fact, and it was also fairly conceded by learned advocate Mr. R. B. Thakor that initially the same petitioner had preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. (F) 25381 of 2024 along with Delay Condonation Application No. 4787 of 2024, which was withdrawn by the petitioner on 19.08.2025 with a view to preferring a review application, as the Division Bench of this Court was not inclined to condone the delay of 649 days, and learned advocate Mr. R. B. Thakor fairly conceded that the aforesaid application was preferred on the same grounds for condonation of delay.
5. The Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 19.08.2025 passed in Civil Application (For Condonation of Delay) No. 4787 of 2024, has passed the following order:
"Since we are not inclined to condone a huge delay of 649 days, Mr.R.B.Thakor, learned advocate for the applicant, seeks permission to withdraw the present Letters Patent Appeal with a liberty to file a review application seeking review on the judgment and order dated 19th October, 2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by PALLAVI PRABHUDAS PANCHAL(HC01403) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 21:46:02 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/6225/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/01/2026 undefined the captioned writ-petition.
Permission, as prayed for, is granted. Hence, the present Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of as withdrawn with the above liberty."
6. Since the Division Bench, on the same grounds, was not inclined to condone the delay of 649 days, this Court also finds the reasons for the delay to be insufficient.
7. When the Division Bench of this Court has not condoned the delay of 649 days, when the application was preferred on the same grounds and such grounds were not considered sufficient for condoning the delay, this Court would certainly not condone the delay of 1047 days in preferring the review application, which is also preferred on the same grounds for condonation of delay. Accordingly, as the delay is not sufficiently explained, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) Pallavi Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by PALLAVI PRABHUDAS PANCHAL(HC01403) on Tue Jan 20 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jan 22 21:46:02 IST 2026