Allahabad High Court
C/M Baba Gaya Das Technical Inter ... vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 2 May, 2024
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:78498-DB
Chief Justice's Court
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 368 of 2024
Appellant :- C/M Baba Gaya Das Technical Inter College And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Jagdish Pathak (S.C.), Narendra Kumar Chaturvedi
Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice
Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
1. This appeal is directed against order dated 18.09.2023, passed by learned Single Judge in Writ - C No. 13481 of 2023 whereby, the learned Single Judge, while deciding a bunch of writ petitions between the parties pertaining to Baba Gaya Das Technical Higher Secondary School Society, passed several directions in all the writ petitions, inter alia, accepting Writ - C No. 30220 of 2018, Writ - C No. 34049 of 2022, Writ - C No. 3259 of 2023 and Writ - C No. 13481 of 2023 and remanded the matter to the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Gorakhpur to determine the electoral collage on the basis of documents produced by both sides and if need arises, after summoning original records in possession of both the rival parties. Further, directions were given to maintain status quo, as it existed on the date of passing of the order in respect of affairs of Society, and Committee of Management was directed to be maintained.
2. The office has reported that the appeal is barred by 175 days. An application seeking condonation of delay has been filed, inter alia, with the submissions that against the impugned order, the appellant had approached Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing Special Leave Petition, which was dismissed with liberty to file Special Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court by order dated 07.03.2024 and that based on wrong legal advice, the Appeal could not be filed in time and therefore, the delay may be condoned.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents made submissions that the plea raised in the application seeking condonation of delay is factually incorrect. It was pointed out that the Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was filed in relation to the order dated 18.09.2023, passed in Writ - C No. 34049 of 2022, which was dismissed as not pressed reserving the liberty to file Special Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. However, the present Appeal is not in relation to Writ - C No. 34049 of 2022 and is against Writ - C No. 13481 of 2023 and therefore, the plea raised that on account of filing of the Special Leave Petition before Hon'ble Supreme Court, the appeal could not be filed in time, is factually incorrect. Further submissions have been made that as the appellant has not questioned the validity of orders passed in Writ - C No. 30220 of 2018, Writ - C No. 34049 of 2022 and Writ - C No. 3259 of 2023, the filing of the present Special Appeal in teeth of the setting aside of the earlier orders, is of no consequence. Submissions have also been made that pursuant to the order of remand, the Assistant Registrar has already concluded the hearing and the judgment is reserved and on that count also, the appeal deserves dismissal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant attempted to make submissions that the orders passed in Writ - C No. 30220 of 2018, Writ - C No. 34049 of 2022 and Writ - C No. 3259 of 2023 were not required to be challenged, looking to the nature of challenge laid in the present Appeal and that irrespective of conclusion of hearing before Assistant Registrar, wherein the appellants have participated, the order deserves to be set aside.
5. We have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. The averments contained in the application seeking condonation of delay are very specific seeking to indicate that on account of approaching Hon'ble Supreme Court against the order impugned, the Appeal could not be filed in time. A bare look at the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 07.03.2024 (Anexure No. 3 to the Special Appeal) reveals that the said S.L.P. was filed in relation to Writ - C No. 34049 of 2022 and the present Special Appeal has been filed in relation to Writ - C No. 13481 of 2023. In the averments contained in Special Appeal in para 22, submissions have been made that the impugned order was challenged by the appellants by filing S.L.P. No. 5434 of 2024 before Hon'ble Supreme Court, which fact essentially is factually incorrect as the order dated 18.09.2023 in relation to Writ - C No. 13481 of 2023 was not the subject matter of the S.P.L., which was dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file Special Appeal.
7. In that view of the matter, as the averments contained in the application and the affidavit seeking condonation of delay are factually incorrect, the appellants are not entitled to seek any indulgence from this Court.
8. Further, the delay in filing the present Appeal has also led to the change in circumstance, wherein the Assistant Registrar has already concluded the hearing in the matter, which aspect also is not disputed by learned counsel for the appellants and on that count also, the delay of six months in filing the present Appeal cannot be condoned.
9. In view of the above discussions, the application filed by the appellant seeking condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed as barred by limitation.
Order Date :- 2.5.2024
Mukesh Pal/P.Sri.
(Vikas Budhwar, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)
