Allahabad High Court
Virendra Yadav vs U.P. Subordinate Service Selection ... on 7 March, 2025
Bench: Vivek Kumar Birla, Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33702-DB Court No. - 43 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 413 of 2019 Appellant :- Virendra Yadav Respondent :- U.P. Subordinate Service Selection Commission (Upsssc) And Another Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
Re: Civil Misc. Delay Application No. Nil of 2024
1. Heard Sri Suraj Pandey, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Ashok Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant.
2. The present review application has been filed by Sri Ashok Kumar Pandey who was not counsel in the Special Appeal. There were three counsel in the appeal namely Sri Vaibhav Tyagi, Sri Aqueel Ahmand and Sri Mahabir Prasad Sarraf. However, no objection has also not been sought by any of the counsel before filing the application. In any case, the stamp reporter has reported the present review application beyond time by 1912 days. The explanation for such huge delay has been offered in para nos. 4, 5 and 6 of the affidavit filed in support of the review application and the same are quoted as under:
"04. That thereafter applicant is trying to gathering the information about the vacancy of posts under that advertisement, and the applicant was filed application under R.T.I Act and the department did not provide the information then applicant filed Appeal before appellate authority. The authority has given information to the petitioner on 03.07.2024.
For kind perusal of this Hon'ble court the copy of information dated 03.07.2024 is annexed as ANNEXURE NO.1 to this affidavit.
05. That thereafter the applicant manage some money and contacted to counsel for filing present application. The delay in filing the appeal is not intentional but because of facts stated above.
06. That the applicant's right is being depriving by the respondents by way of awarding the marks in wrong method, the applicant has fully hope for justice by this Hon'ble court."
3. Admittedly, the appeal was dismissed on merits vide order dated 14.5.2019. Annexure 1 to the affidavit filed in delay condonation application refers to some application filed before U.P. Adhinasth Seva Chayan Ayog, Lucknow which is of the year 2024. The RTI application form refers to the date of filing of application as 24.8.2023 and as per perusal thereof, it is clear that for four years the petitioner/applicant did nothing.
4. We do not find the explanation so offered sufficient to condone the delay in filing the review application apart from the fact that the same has been filed by a different counsel. Moreover, to do complete justice, we have also seen the reasoning given in second paragraph of the second page of the order and we do not find any good ground for review of the reasoning so given.
5. The delay condonation application is, accordingly, rejected.
Re: Civil Misc. Review Application No. 421 of 2024
1. The delay condonation application filed in filing the review application has been rejected.
2. Consequently, the review application also stands rejected.
Order Date :- 7.3.2025 Madhurima