State Of Gujarat vs Manish Vinubhai Trivedi
2023 Latest Caselaw 8458 Guj

Gujarat High Court

State Of Gujarat vs Manish Vinubhai Trivedi on 6 December, 2023

Author: N.V.Anjaria

Bench: N.V.Anjaria

                                                                                        NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/CA/1611/2023                                     ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

                                                                                         undefined




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.                               1611
                         of 2023

         In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 27588 of 2023
==========================================================
                             STATE OF GUJARAT
                                  Versus
                         MANISH VINUBHAI TRIVEDI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RONAK RAVAL, AGP for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
RULE SERVED 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 Assistant Government Pleader Ronak Raval for the applicant State. Rule is served, however none appears for the respondent.

2. By the present application, delay of 319 days is prayed to be condoned.

2.1 The applicant is State, which has mentionedin the application explaining the passage time that legal opinion was sought for by the Medical Superintendent regarding preferring an appeal after receipt of the copy of the judgment and order of learned Single Judge. Thereafter, a proposal was

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/CA/1611/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2023

undefined

forwarded on 19.10.2022 to the Additional Director. The Additional Director wanted certain information regarding the matter, which was provided.

2.2 Finally, decision was taken to prefer an appeal. The papers were sent to the office of the Government Law Officers and thereafter, to the office of the Government Pleader in the High Court.

3. The passage of time, is reflective of administrative process, which could not be said that the applicant or its officers were negligent or have given up the intention to prefer the appeal.

4. In above view and further in view of absence of any contest, sufficient cause is made out to condone the delay.

5. Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J)

(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J) BIJOY B. PILLAI