High Court Of J&K vs Tahir Khurshid Raina & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 2294 j&K

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND
                   LADAKH AT JAMMU
                        (THROUGH VIRTUAL MODE)


                                                   Reserved on: 06.10.2023
                                                   Pronounced on:13.10.2023

                            CM No.2510/2023
                             RP No.74/2023

HIGH COURT OF J&K                    ...APPLICANT/PETITIONER(S)
Through: -    Mr. Aditya Gupta, Advocate.


Vs.

TAHIR KHURSHID RAINA & ORS.                         ...RESPONDENT(S)
Through: -    Mr. Rahul Pant, Adv. for R1& R2.
              Mr. K. S. Johal, Sr. Adv-for R3&R4


CORAM:

        HON'BLE MR. RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE


                                 ORDER

Rajnesh Oswal 'J'

1) This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the

review petition against the judgment dated 05.12.2022 passed in SWP

No.2224/2018 titled "Tahir Khurshid Raina vs. High Court of J&K &

Ors."

2) It is stated that the Courts were closing for vacation in the month

of December, 2022 and then Registrar General demitted the office in

the month of January, 2023. Thereafter the present incumbent took over

CM No.2510/2023 RP No.74/2023 1|Page the office of the Registrar General and in the meanwhile, the present

Hon'ble Chief Justice also took over the office. The representation

dated 16.12.2022 filed by the non-applicant No.1 was placed before the

Hon'ble Chief Justice for instructions and after consideration, it was

decided that review petition be preferred against the impugned

judgment.

3) The applicant has attributed the delay in filing the present

application to the change of Registrar General and Hon'ble the Chief

Justice.

4) The non-applicant No.1 has filed the response stating therein that

it was incumbent upon applicant to comply with the judgment/order

dated 05.12.2022 within a period of two months and was supposed to

finalize and notify the seniority list of the cadre of District Judges upto

05.02.2023. It is also stated that the then Registrar General demitted the

office on 31.01.2023 just five days before the outer limit laid down by

this Court for compliance of the judgment and the reasons furnished by

the applicant for condoning the delay are not convincing. In nutshell,

the stand of the non-applicant is that the applicant has not demonstrated

sufficient cause to condone the delay.

5)    Heard and perused the record.


6)    This is an admitted fact that then Registrar General of this Court

upon superannuation demitted his office on 31st January, 2023. It is also

an admitted fact that earlier there was Acting Chief Justice of this Court CM No.2510/2023 RP No.74/2023 2|Page and the present Hon'ble Chief Justice took over the charge on

13.02.2023. It is the positive case of the applicant that the

representation of the non-applicant No.1 was placed before the Hon'ble

Chief Justice and then it was decided to file review petition against the

judgment dated 05.12.2022.

7) There is a delay of 110 days in filing the review petition against

the aforesaid judgment. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Delhi Development Authority vs. Jagan Singh & Ors. 2023 INSC

620, while condoning the delay, has held as under:

"Over the years, this Court has repeatedly held that a liberal and justice-oriented approach needs to be adopted in the matters of condonation of delay so that the substantive rights of the parties are not defeated only on the grounds of delay. The power under Section 5 of the Limitation act, 1963 must be exercised in a very meaningful manner which will serve the ends of justice."

8) The Court while considering the issue of condonation of delay

has to adopt a pragmatic approach and to find out whether there was

gross negligence or deliberate inaction on the part of a litigant and if

this Court comes to the conclusion that the delay is neither deliberate

nor intentional, the delay can be condoned.

9) After having gone through the contents of the application seeking

condonation of delay, this Court is of the considered view that the

applicant has demonstrated sufficient cause for condoning the delay in

filing the review petition. Accordingly, this application is allowed and

CM No.2510/2023 RP No.74/2023 3|Page the delay in filing the review petition is condoned. The Registry is

directed to list the review petition on 15.11.2023.

        (RAHUL BHARTI)                         (RAJNESH OSWAL)
            JUDGE                                  JUDGE
Srinagar
13.10.2023
"Bhat Altaf, PS"


                   Whether the order is speaking:     Yes/No
                   Whether the order is reportable:   Yes/No




CM No.2510/2023
RP No.74/2023                                                  4|Page