The Ap State Wakf Board vs Saleema Begum
2024 Latest Caselaw 1918 AP

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

The Ap State Wakf Board vs Saleema Begum on 1 March, 2024

Author: R Raghunandan Rao

Bench: R Raghunandan Rao

APHC010255282023
                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ::
                                     AMARAVATI
                            (Special Original Jurisdiction)
                                                              [3446]
                        FRIDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF MARCH
                        TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

                               PRESENT

   HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR

       THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

                          I.A.No.3 of 2023
                               in/and
                   WRIT APPEAL NO: 1137 OF 2023

Between:

THE AP STATE WAKF BOARD                            ...APPELLANT(S)
                                AND

SALEEMA BEGUM AND OTHERS                          ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Appellant(s) :Sri Mohammed Gayasuddin

Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Sri Murali Lincoln

Counsel for respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6 : Government Pleader for Revenue

Counsel for respondent No.4 & 5 : Government Pleader for Registration & Stamps

The Court made the following:

P C:

IA.No.3 of 2023 is an application seeking condonation of 238

days delay in preferring the present appeal against the judgment

and order, dated 17th August, 2022 passed in WP.No.5593 of 2021.

The appeal was preferred finally on 12th May, 2023.

2. It is stated that a copy of the order impugned was

received by the applicant on 21st November, 2022. It is further

stated that on the date of receipt of the order from the Court, since

there was no standing counsel for some period, the appeal could not

be filed immediately thereafter. Further, the standing counsel was

appointed on 14th December, 2022 where-after the appeal came to

be preferred on 12th May, 2023.

3. On a perusal of the averments made in the application,

even if one were to accept the explanation that upto 14th December,

2022 the appeal could not be filed on account of non availability of a

standing counsel, yet, there is no satisfactory explanation rendered

to explain the delay from 14th December, 2022 onwards till the

actual filing of the present appeal on 12th May, 2023. The

explanation rendered by learned counsel for the applicant that

there was too much of work for the standing counsel on account of

which the delay occurred, to us, does not seem to be a satisfactory

explanation for purposes of condoning the delay in preferring the

present appeal.

4. IA.No.3 of 2023 is therefore found to be without merit

and is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the Writ Appeal also

stands dismissed. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand

dismissed.

DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

Vjl