The State Of Jharkhand Through Its ... vs Kumod Kumar Thakur
2025 Latest Caselaw 3798 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

The State Of Jharkhand Through Its ... vs Kumod Kumar Thakur on 10 June, 2025

Author: Rajesh Shankar

Bench: Rajesh Shankar

   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
             L.P.A. No. 139 of 2025
1. The State of Jharkhand through its Secretary, Road Construction
   Department, having its office at Project Building, P.O. & P.S.
   Dhurwa, Town & District Ranchi
2. The Joint Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government
   of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building, P.O. & P.S.
   Dhurwa, Town & District Ranchi
3. The     Engineer-in-Chief,      Road Construction    Department,
   Government of Jharkhand, having its office at Project Building,
   P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Town & District- Ranchi
4. The Superintending Engineer, Road Construction Department,
   Road Circle, Daltonganj, Government of Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S.
   Medininagar, District Palamau
5. The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road
   Construction Department, Road Division, Garhwa, Government of
   Jharkhand, P.O. & P.S. Garhwa, District-Garhwa
                                        ...     ...    Appellants
                         Versus
   Kumod Kumar Thakur, son of Late Kamlakant Thakur, resident of
   C/o Mithilesh Kumar Jha, Kutchery Road, Garhwa, P.O. & P.S.
   Garhwa, District-Garhwa-822114               ...    Respondents
                         ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

---------

For the Appellants: Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, S.C. (L&C)-I For the Respondents: Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate

---------

05/Dated: 10.06.2025

1. The instant interlocutory application is filed under section 5 of the

Limitation Act, 1963 to condone delay of 153 days in filing this

appeal challenging the judgment dt. 12.04.2024 as corrected on

10.07.2024 by the learned single Judge in W.P(S) No. 7051 of

2017.

2. Though, this application is opposed by the counsel for the

respondent, since the delay occurred on account of the fact that

there was a typographical error also in the certified copy of the

order wherein the name of the respondent was incorrectly

mentioned and the year of the writ petition was wrongly mentioned

and this required to be corrected, in the facts and circumstances of

the case, we are of the opinion that sufficient cause has been

shown by the applicants for condoning the said period of delay.

3. Therefore, the instant interlocutory application is allowed and the

delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

4. List on 02.07.2025.

(M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.)

(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Sharda/MM/ Cp.01