Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. Thru. Secretary Deptt. Of ... vs Doodh Nath Shukla & 3 Others (Inre 655 S/S ... on 22 January, 2020
Bench: Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 1 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 334 of 2016 Appellant :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secretary Deptt. Of Revenue & 4 Others Respondent :- Doodh Nath Shukla & 3 Others (Inre 655 S/S 2012) Counsel for Appellant :- Standing Counsel Counsel for Respondent :- Pradeep Singh Somvanshi Hon'ble Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal,J.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard Sri Q.H. Rizvi, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Pradeep Singh Somvanshi, learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner.
This intra Court appeal is barred by 3 years 11 months 18 days.
The impugned order has been passed in the presence of the learned Counsel for the State on 30.07.2012, therefore, the State has to file appeal within 90 days but the State slept over the matter.
In the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal ( C.M. Application No. 77968 of 2016 ), it has been stated on behalf of the State/appellants that delay occurred due to procedural as the requisite permission was not granted in time for filing the present appeal.
On 16.08.2016, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed the following order :
"We are not satisfied with the explanation given for the delay.
Learned counsel for the appellants may file a better affidavit explaining as to who are the officers responsible for causing delay in filing the appeal and as to why the costs be not imposed on them while considering the condonation of delay, to be realized from their salary who are responsible for the same."
From perusal of the record, it reveals that no affidavit in pursuance of the aforesaid order dated 16.08.2016 has been filed on behalf of the State till today.
Considering the aforesaid, we are of the view that reasons assigned in the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal are not satisfactory, therefore, application for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal (C. M. Application No. 77968 of 2016) is hereby rejected. Consequently, the present appeal is also dismissed.
However, the appellant is free to recover the amount for the loss of State exchequer from the salary of the erring officer(s) in accordance with law.
.
(Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.) (Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal, J.) Order Date :- 22.1.2020 Ajit/-