Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Surekhaben Kantilal Patel on 9 June, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2805/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/06/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO.
2805 of 2025
In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 14437 of 2025
=============================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Versus
SUREKHABEN KANTILAL PATEL & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MS SHRUTI R. DHRUVE, AGP for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR TEJAS D SHUKLA(5312) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 09/06/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. The present application is filed seeking condonation of
delay of 194 days in filing the captioned appeal.
2. The following averments are made explaining the delay
of 194 days in filing the captioned appeal.
"3. It is stated that pursuant to the passing of the impugned
judgment and order dated 11.09.2024 and came to be uploaded
on official website of the Hon'ble High Court on 03.10.2024.
Vide communication dated 10.10.2024, the respondent No.1-4
have communicated the order passed in captioned SCA which
has been inwarded by the office of appellant on 17.10.2024. The
office of appellant vide communication dated 17.10.2024 had
sought for a legal opinion of the Assistant Government Pleader
the same was received at the office of Government pleaders on
21.10.2024 and such communication was further assigned for
opinion on 22.10.2024 and on 26.10.2024 opinion was received
which was addressed to the appellant vide communication dated
29.10.2024 and received at the office of appellant on
04.11.2024.
4. In pursuance to impugned order upon verification of the
service records of the respondent No. 1 to 4 commencing from
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2805/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/06/2025
undefined
respective dates of appointment till date of passing of the order,
it was found that the respondents had not been enlisted in the
approval list at any point of time in pursuance to GR dated
24.10.2017 nor any application for approval of staff profile has
been received from the respondent No.1 to 5. It is submitted
that therefore vide communication dated 04.11.2024 the
proposal was acceded requesting for approval from the
Commissioner of Schools. On 12.11.2024 vide communication
No. COS/0009/11/2024 necessary missing details were called
for from the appellant by the office of Commissioner of Schools
which were duly provided vide communication dated 13.11.2024
issued by the appellant. Against which vide letter dated
29.11.2024 COS/10+2/uma-2/2024/6344 further details were
called for from the appellant for substantiating the stance of
appellant in challenging LPA. Vide communication dated
29.11.2024, the response was given by the appellant to the
letter dated 29.11.2024. After inter-se internal discussions and
exchange of documentations between appellant and
Commissioner of Schools, the approval was received from Legal
Department on 20.02.2025, received at office of Government
Pleaders on 27.02.2025. Vide communication dated 01.03.2025
the office of Government Pleaders called for records to
substantiate the LPA to be drafted. On 11.03.2025, the
documents were duly provided by the office of the appellant
along with approval of Commissioner of Schools dated
07.03.2025 which were duly received at the office of the
Government Law Officers on 12.03.2025. It is submitted that
after necessary administrative formalities and examination of
complete set of records provided as per State Litigation Policy,
vide communication dated 18.03.2025 the compilation of
documents were assigned to the concerned law officer for
drafting of the LPA which were handed over to the Assistant
Government Pleader on 05.04.2025 and subsequently the draft
was prepared on 22.04.2025. After receiving necessary
approvals the draft came to be affirmed on the date
undersigned."
3. Learned advocate Mr.Shukla, appearing for the
respondents, vehemently opposing the present application,
has submitted that there is a huge delay and the same may
not be condoned.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/2805/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/06/2025
undefined
4. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and considering the averments made
hereinabove and also considering the fact that the delay is
sufficiently explained, present application is allowed. The delay
of 194 days is condoned.
5. Registry to give pakka number to the captioned appeal
and list the same in seriatim.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
Sd/-
(R. T. VACHHANI, J)
MAHESH/08
