J B Vaghela vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

J B Vaghela vs State Of Gujarat on 28 April, 2025

Author: A.S. Supehia

Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi

                                                                                                                    NEUTRAL CITATION




                              C/CA/2334/2025                                        ORDER DATED: 28/04/2025

                                                                                                                    undefined




                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                         R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2334 of
                                                     2025
                                  In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 12815 of 2025
                       ==========================================================
                                                            J B VAGHELA
                                                                Versus
                                                      STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR JIGNESH D LAMBA FOR MR YOGEN N PANDYA(5766) for the
                       Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MS NIRALI SARDA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
                       ==========================================================
                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
                               and
                               HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

                                                   Date : 28/04/2025
                                                    ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)

1. The present application is filed seeking condonation of delay of 89 days in filing the captioned appeal.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that delay may be condoned since despite the best efforts are made by the applicant-appellant, the appeal could not be filed within limitation period.

3. Learned AGP has opposed the present application and has submitted that since delay is not appropriately explained, the same may not be condoned.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2334/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/04/2025 undefined

4. In the present application, the following explanation is tendered by the applicant.

"3. It is submitted that upon receipt of the certified copy of the impugned judgment, the applicant took immediate steps to consult legal counsel and initiate the necessary formalities for filing the Letters Patent Appeal. The impugned judgment spans intricate and nuanced questions of law involving constitutional violations, service law implications, and alleged administrative mala fides, all of which required careful legal vetting and preparation.

4. *** *** ***

5. The applicant had submitted detailed and repeated representations to the concerned authorities, as evidenced by formal communications dated 19.09.2013, 28.07.2014, 22.04.2015, 03.06.2015, 29.06.2015, 13.04.2016 and 13.07.2016. Each of these representations was a sincere effort on the part of the applicant to assert and protect his legitimate service rights, particularly concerning promotion and consequential monetary and seniority benefits. These representations were niether vague not casual, but specific, consistent, and demonstrative of the applicant's genuine desire to exhaust administrative remedies before invoking the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court.

6. It is most respectfully submitted that the cause of action in the present matter is of a continuing and recurring nature, and did not cease upon the petitioner's retirement. Rather, it culminated with the ultimate denial of relief sought, thereby necessitating the filing of the writ petition and, upon dismissal, the present appeal. The principle of continuing wrong squarely applies to the facts of the present case, and hence, the petitioner cannot be faulted for any alleged delay when the grievance persisted unabated and without redress until culmination in the impugned judgment."

NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/2334/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/04/2025 undefined

5. We find the aforementioned explanation satisfactory and hence, in our considered opinion, delay requires to be condoned. The same is hereby condoned.

6. The present application stands allowed. Registry to give regular number to the captioned appeal and list the same in seriatim.

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) (GITA GOPI,J) NVMEWADA/8 Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by N.V.MEWADA(HC01571) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 09:42:39 IST 2025