Balku Bedia vs State Of Jharkhand Through Deputy ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 3923 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Balku Bedia vs State Of Jharkhand Through Deputy ... on 13 June, 2025

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                 C.M.P. No. 809 of 2024
                                          With
                                  I.A. No. 9675 of 2024

                1. Balku Bedia
                2. Jitu Bedia                          ...     ...      Petitioners
                                      Versus
            1. State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner,
             Hazaribagh (now Ramgarh)
            2. The Deputy Chief Engineers (Const.) East Central Railway
            3. Arjun Bedia
            4. Prayag Bedia                         ...        Opp. Parties
                                      ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioners : Mr. Mitul Kumar, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Sr. Panel Counsel Mr. Abhijeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Ms. Shalini Shahdeo, A.C. to S.C. (L&C)-I

---

03/13.06.2025 As per office note, notice has been validly served.

2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition for condonation of delay being I.A. No. 9675 of 2024 is taken along with the main CMP i.e. CMP No. 809 of 2024 for restoration.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that this interlocutory application has been filed for condonation of delay of 730 days in filing the CMP for restoration. He submits that the defects could not be removed within the time granted by this court vide order dated 09.12.2020 and in the meantime there was covid-19 situation. The learned counsel has submitted that similar matters have been disposed of by this court arising out of the same judgment and compensation has been enhanced. He submits that the petition for condonation of delay be allowed and the First Appeal No. 154 of 2018 be restored to its original file so that the defects in connection with the First Appeal be removed and the matter is finally disposed of.

4. Learned counsel for the opposite parties though have opposed the prayer for condonation of delay but no counter affidavit as such has been filed to the interlocutory application and it is not in dispute that the order was passed by this court there was intervening covid-19 situation.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and being satisfied with the cause shown in the interlocutory application seeking condonation of delay, the delay of 730 days in filing the CMP is condoned and I.A. No. 9675 of 2024 is hereby allowed.

6. This CMP has been filed for restoration of F.A. No. 154 of 2018 which stood dismissed on 04.07.2022 for non-compliance of order passed by this court dated 09.12.2020 on account of non- removal of defects.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that a few defects were removed and the remaining could not be removed due to inadvertence after re-opening of the physical working of the court proceedings.

8. Learned counsel for the opposite parties have no serious objection so far as restoration is concerned.

9. Being satisfied with the cause shown in the CMP, F.A. No. 154 of 2018 is restored to its original file and CMP No. 809 of 2024 is hereby allowed.

10. It will be opened to the appellants to remove the surviving defects in F.A. No. 154 of 2018.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Binit