District Development Officer vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 8457 Guj

Gujarat High Court

District Development Officer vs State Of Gujarat on 6 December, 2023

Author: N.V.Anjaria

Bench: N.V.Anjaria

                                                                              NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/CA/1443/2023                            ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

                                                                               undefined




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.                     1443
                         of 2023

         In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 27607 of 2022

==========================================================
                      DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
                                 Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS RV ACHARYA(1124) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the Respondent(s) No.
10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,2
8,29,3,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,4,40,41,42,43,44,45,
46,47,48,49,5,50,51,52,53,54,6,7,8,9
MS SHRUTI DHRUve, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH
        ROY

                           Date : 06/12/2023

                           ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)

Heard learned advocate Ms.Kinjal Prajapati for learned advocate Ms. R.V. Acharya for the applicant, learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shruti Dhruve for the respondent State and learned advocate Mr. Smit Vaghela for learned advocate Mr. Vaibhav Vyas for the concerned respondents.

2. It is to condone the delay of 79 days, which has taken place in preferring the Letters Patent Appeal, that the present application is filed by the District Development Officer.

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1443/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

undefined

3. It is stated in the application, explaining the passage of time leading to aforesaid delay, that after the judgment and order was passed by learned Single Judge on 06.05.2022, the panel advocate was requested to proceed to file the appeal. Certified copy was received and thereafter, the appeal was filed.

3.1 The averments in the application show that there was never an abandonment of the intention to file the appeal. The time is consumed in taking the legal advice and preparing the appeal papers. Sufficient cause is made out.

4. Delay of 79 deserves to be condoned and is condoned.

5. Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J) BIJOY B. PILLAI