Union Territory Of J&K And Another vs Anju Bala
2021 Latest Caselaw 483 j&K

                                                                   Sr. No. 152
               HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
                          AT JAMMU
CJ Court

Case: LPA No. 60 of 2021
(Through Virtual mode)


Union Territory of J&K and another                   ...Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)
                                  Through: Sh. H. A. Siddiqui, Sr. AAG.

                          v/s
Anju Bala                                                       .... Respondent(s)
                                  Through:
         CORAM:
         HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE


                                       ORDER

1. Heard Sh. H. A. Siddiqui, learned Sr. AAG for the appellants.

2. The LPA has been preferred against the judgment and order dated

06.11.2015 passed in SWP No. 2986/2015, Anju Bala v. Chairman, Services

Selection Board and another.

3. There is a delay of 1880 days in the filing the appeal i.e. of about six

years.

4. In the delay condonation application, the appellants have accepted

that the copy of the judgment impugned was received in the office of the

Services Selection Board on 12.11.2015 and that the matter was taken up with

the General Administration Department in 2015 itself for according sanction

for the filing of the LPA. The sanction was accorded vide communication

dated 03.10.2019 which was received in the month of January 2020.

5. In view of the above explanation furnished by the appellants, it is

ample clear that the Government had not taken steps for granting sanction from

2015 till 2019 i.e. for a period of four years. It appears that the relevant

authorities slept over the matter all these four years for which there is no

explanation whatsoever on record.

6. In view of the above, we are not satisfied that the appellants were

prevented by any sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. It is a case of

gross negligence and the delay in filing the appeal is not liable to be condoned.

7. Delay condonation application No.3355/2021 is rejected.

8. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as barred by time.

                               (RAJNESH OSWAL)                           (PANKAJ MITHAL)
                                        JUDGE                             CHIEF JUSTICE
        Jammu
        16.04.2021
        Raj Kumar


                                  Whether the order is speaking:     Yes/No.

Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No.

RAJ KUMAR 2021.04.16 16:31