Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Union Territory Of J&K And Another vs Tej Krishan Ganjoo on 23 February, 2021
105
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
AT JAMMU
LPA No. 25/2021
CM Nos. 1569 & 1570/2021
Union Territory of J&K and another .....Appellant(s)
Through :- Mr. Ayjaz Lone, Dy. AG
V/s
Tej Krishan Ganjoo .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Mr. C. M. Koul, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Kapil Gupta, Advocate
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, JUDGE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
ORDER
23.02.2021
CM No. 1569/2021
The instant application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of
approximately 1091 days in preferring the Letters Patent Appeal against the
judgement and order dated 12.12.2017.
According to the averments made in the application, upon receipt of the
judgement and order supra, same was forwarded to the Department of Law,
Justice & Parliamentary Affairs, who then appears to have advised the
Department of Forest to prefer an appeal against the judgement and order in
question. The communication from the Law Department is dated 28.05.2020,
which however does not make any reference to the date when the Forest
Department had sought its legal opinion in the matter. Whether there was delay
on the part of the Forest Department seeking such a legal opinion or the delay
was at the hands of the Department of Law, Justice & Parliamentary Affairs has
not specifically been explained.
Learned counsel for the applicants/appellants state that the delay had also
occurred on account of the COVID pandemic. However, even if the period of
pandemic is to be excluded from consideration, still there is approximately a
delay of two years in preferring the application as also the Letters Patent
Appeal. To butter his arguments, learned counsel for the applicants/appellants
has placed reliance on Apex Court Judgement in "G. Ramegowda, Major and
others Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bangalore", reported in (1998) 2
SCC 142.
The application filed by the applicants/appellants lacks in material
particulars and does not at all justify the condonation of delay, which is sought
in the present case. Reliance can be placed on judgement of Apex Court passed
in "Post Master General and others Vs Living Media India Limited &
another" reported in (2012) 3 SCC 563, wherein in paragraph 29 held as
under:-
"29. In our view, it is the right time to inform all the
government bodies, their agencies and
instrumentalities that unless they have reasonable and
acceptable explanation for the delay and there was
bona fide effort, there is no need to accept the usual
explanation that the file was kept pending for several
months/years due to considerable degree of procedural
red tape in the process. The government departments
are under a special obligation to ensure that they
perform their duties with diligence and commitment.
Condonation of delay is an exception and should not
be used as an anticipated benefit for government
departments. The law shelters everyone under the
same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of
a few."
Following the ratio of the aforementioned judgment, since the
applicants/appellants have failed to explain the delay satisfactorily, we are of the
opinion that the delay, therefore, cannot be condoned. The condonation
application is, accordingly, dismissed. Consequently, the accompanying appeal
also stands dismissed.
(Javed Iqbal Wani) (Dhiraj Singh Thakur)
Judge Judge
JAMMU
23.02.2021
(Muneesh)
MUNEESH SHARMA
2021.02.24 13:53
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
