Manipur High Court
State Of Manipur; & Ors vs Majasinliu Kamei on 16 November, 2021
KABORA Digitally signed
by
MBAM KABORAMBAM Item No. 9 & 10
SANDEEP SANDEEP SINGH
Date: 2021.11.16
(Through Video Conferencing)
SINGH 17:29:38 +05'30' IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
MC (W.A.) No. 13 of 2018
With
W.A. No. 9 of 2018
State of Manipur; & Ors.
Applicants/Appellants
Vs.
Majasinliu Kamei
Respondent
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MV MURALIDARAN
16.11.2021
Sanjay Kumar (C.J.):
[1] Heard Mr. Th. Vashum, learned Government Advocate, appearing
for the applicants/appellants.
[2] The State of Manipur and its officials in the Education Department
filed W.A. No. 9 of 2018, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 19.10.2016
passed in W.P. (C) No. 249 of 2013. However, claiming that there was a delay of
491 days on their part in doing so, they filed MC (W.A) No. 13 of 2018 to condone
the same.
Be it noted that the judgment and order under appeal was passed
as long back as on 19.10.2016 but the application for a certified copy thereof was
made only on 30.01.2018. The writ appeal came to be filed on 26.04.2018 though
the certified copy was made available on 21.02.2018.
MC (W.A) No. 13 of 2018 with
W.A. No. 9 of 2018 Page 1
[3] Notice was ordered in the condone delay application on 30.04.2018
and the applicants/appellants were directed to take steps to effect service of
notice upon the respondent/writ petitioner. On 04.06.2018, Mr. BR. Sharma,
learned counsel, appeared for the respondent/writ petitioner and sought time to
file objections. On 26.09.2019, this Court took note of the fact that the delay was
not correctly shown and granted time to Mr. Th. Vashum, learned Government
Advocate, to amend the condone delay application showing the actual number of
days of delay, which was found to be nearly 522 days. No steps seem to have
been taken in this regard but in the meanwhile, on 05.12.2019, Mr. BR Sharma,
learned counsel, informed the Court that the respondent/writ petitioner was no
more and that he was instructed to give the details of her LRs to the other side.
On 15.04.2021, Mr. Th. Vashum, learned Government Advocate, informed the
Court that the list of legal heirs of the deceased respondent has been furnished to
him and sought time to verify and take suitable steps. However, as no steps were
taken in that regard, this Court passed an order on 17.09.2021 to the effect that
Mr. Th. Vashum, learned Government Advocate, should take necessary steps at
least by the next date of hearing failing which the case would be rejected
peremptorily. The matter was adjourned to 16.11.2021.
Today, we find that no steps have been taken to implead the LRs of
the deceased respondent/writ petitioner despite the caution sounded on the last
occasion that the matter would be dismissed for such failure.
[4] Given the aforestated facts, the lack of seriousness on the part of
the applicants/appellants in prosecuting this case is manifest. Lack of application
of mind in calculating the days of delay correctly only strengthens this opinion.
MC (W.A) No. 13 of 2018 with
W.A. No. 9 of 2018 Page 2
Despite ample time being granted and in spite of a specific order cautioning them
that the case would be dismissed if they failed to implead the legal heirs of the
deceased respondent, no steps have been taken.
[5] In these circumstances, this Court is constrained to hold against the
applicants/appellants on this technical ground. It is not open to the authorities to
assume, as a matter of course, that delays on their part in appealing against
orders would be condoned for the mere asking and that procedural norms need to
be respected only by default.
The condone delay application and, in consequence, the writ appeal
are accordingly dismissed as having abated for want of necessary steps being
taken within time.
In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
A copy of this order shall be supplied online or through whatsapp to
the learned counsel for the parties.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Sandeep
MC (W.A) No. 13 of 2018 with
W.A. No. 9 of 2018 Page 3
