Jharkhand High Court
The State Of Jharkhand And Another vs Shivendu Pathak & Another on 13 June, 2025
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A. No. 90 of 2023
The State of Jharkhand and Another ... Appellants
Versus
Shivendu Pathak & Another .... Respondents
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
---------
For the Appellants: Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, S.C. (L&C)-I
For Respondent No.1: Mr. Rishikesh Giri, Advocate
Mr. Rishav Kumar, Advocate
---------
Reserved on: 10.06.2025 Pronounced on: 13 /06/2025
Per M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.
I.A. No. 4610 of 2024
1. This application is filed by the applicants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay of 601 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal challenging judgment dt. 27.07.2022 in W.P.(S) No. 1404 of 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge.
2. The said period of delay for the most part appears to be on account of the late filing of the certified copy of the impugned judgment, copy of which was applied on 29.3.2023 and was secured on 10.4.2023, though the Appeal itself was filed on 22.02.2023.
3. It is stated in the application seeking condonation of delay that on 18.1.2023 the applicants-Department came to know about the status of the Writ Petition which was allowed by the learned Single Judge; on 24.1.2023, the record of the file was sent to the Law Department for its opinion; on 24.1.2023 the Law Department forwarded the file to the Advocate General and on 25.1.2023, he had given an opinion. It is stated that on 30.1.2023 the applicants- Department proceeded for preparation of the grounds of Appeal, and on
-1 of 2- 7.2.2023 it authorized an officer to file Letters Patent Appeal, and on 22.2.2023 the L.P.A. was filed. It is stated that the certified copy which has been obtained was filed on 18.4.2024. It is contended that if the delay is counted upto the date of filing of the L.P.A. on 22.02.2023, the delay is not much and may be excused.
4. If the delay is counted from the date of the impugned judgment till the date of filing of the L.P.A. it appears to be only 175 days. Now doubt because of the delay in filing the certified copy on 18.4.2024, the delay ballooned 601 days.
5. Though the delay in filing the certified copy has not been properly explained, the delay between the date of the judgment and the date of filing of the L.P.A. cannot be said to be inordinate taking into account the fact that the applicants-Department claims to have come to know about the fate of the Writ Petition on 18.1.2023.
6. Though the sole respondent has opposed the condonation of delay by contending that the reasons given for seeking such condonation are false, misleading and lack bonafides, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the delay has been sufficiently explained and because it is not inordinate and occurred on account of certain procedures which are required to be followed, the delay in filing the L.P.A. is condoned and the I.A. No. 4610 of 2024 is allowed.
L.P.A. No. 90 of 2023
7. List under the heading for 'Admission' on 15th July, 2025.
(M. S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.) (Rajesh Shankar, J.) VK
-2 of 2-