Gurudas Yadav And Another vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 262 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 29
 
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 649 of 2022
 
Appellant :- Gurudas Yadav And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Appellant :- Prabhakar Dwivedi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

In Re:- Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2022

Heard Sri Rajjan Singh, holding brief of Sri Prabhakar Dwivedi, for the appellants; and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2.

By this delay condonation application, the appellants seek condonation of 200 days delay in filing the intra court appeal against the judgment and order dated 06.05.2022 whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed Writ-A No.6691 of 2019 filed by the appellants for a direction upon the respondents to consider compassionate appointment of the appellant no.1 in lieu of death of his father on 13.03.1990.

The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition of the appellants by observing that the purpose of compassionate appointment is to provide succour to the bereaved family on account of sudden loss of its bread winner whereas in this case death had taken place several decades before, therefore, there was no justification to provide compassionate appointment.

The intra court appeal is reported to be beyond time by 200 days.

In the delay condonation application, the explanation offered for condonation of delay is that the appellant is a poor person and could not arrange for funds to file the appeal therefore the delay in filing the appeal be condoned.

Considering the nature of the claim made in the writ petition and the reasons recorded by the learned Single Judge for dismissing the same while keeping in mind that there is nothing on record as to how the appellant could manage funds to file the writ petition if he has difficulty in arranging funds for the appeal, we do not find the explanation good and sufficient to condone the delay more so, when condoning the same would serve no useful purpose. The delay condonation application is accordingly rejected. The appeal is dismissed as barred by limitation.

Order Date :- 3.1.2023/AKShukla/-