State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... vs Paras Nath Singh Yadav And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 20057 ALL

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 20057 ALL
Judgement Date : 1 August, 2023

Allahabad High Court

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... vs Paras Nath Singh Yadav And Others on 1 August, 2023

Bench: Attau Rahman Masoodi, Om Prakash Shukla





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:50573-DB
 
Court No. - 2
 

 
Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 161 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Coopertive Deptt. U.P. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Another
 
Opposite Party :- Paras Nath Singh Yadav And Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

1. Heard learned State Counsel for the applicant.

2. There is reported delay of 1827 days in instituting the present review application arising out of the judgment/order dated 08.07.2016 rendered in Writ Petition No.479 (S/B) of 2007.

3. The State had assailed the judgment impugned herein in this review application before Hon'ble the Apex Court and the S.L.P. so preferred was converted into Civil Appeal No.11813 of 2016, which came to be disposed of on 14.01.2020 in terms of the order, which reads as under :-

"There are only two private party respondents (one in each Appeal) who have already retired.

Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the cases, we decline to entertain these appeals, which are accordingly dismissed. However, the question of law is kept open."

4. Having gone through the order passed by Hon'ble the Apex Court, we clearly find that the question of law was left open and this does not imply that the State was given a liberty of instituting the review petition even after dismissal of S.L.P. Once the officers impleaded before the Apex Court had already attained the age of superannuation, the proceedings with the passing of order by Hon'ble the Apex Court stood concluded, hence we do not find any merit in the application seeking condonation of delay on the reasons and explanation put forth in the affidavit filed in support thereof, whatsoever.

5. The application for condonation of delay is accordingly rejected and consequently the review application as well.

(Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.)

Order Date :- 1.8.2023

Anand Sri./-