State Of Manipur; & Ors vs L. Amusana Singh; & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 187 Mani

KABORAM Digitally signed
        by
BAM     KABORAMBAM
SANDEEP SANDEEP    SINGH
        Date: 2021.09.09
                                                                                                   Item No. 7
                                                                                   (Through Video Conferencing)
SINGH   15:34:59 +05'30'


                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
                                                  AT IMPHAL

                                             MC (W.A.) No. 10 of 2018
                                             (Ref: W.A. No. 6 of 2018)
                            State of Manipur; & Ors.
                                                                                            Applicants
                                                 Vs.
                            L. Amusana Singh; & Ors.

                                                                                          Respondent

BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

09.09.2021 Sanjay Kumar (C.J.):

Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned Advocate General, Manipur, appears for the

applicants/appellants.

The State of Manipur and its authorities in the Education Department

seek condonation of the delay of 221 days in filing an appeal against the order

dated 06.06.2017 passed by a learned Judge of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 779 of

2015.

Notice having been ordered, Mr. RK Nokulsana, learned senior

counsel, assisted by Mr. RK Michael, learned counsel, appears for the contesting

respondents.

Perusal of the application reflects that minute details were furnished of

the movement of the relevant file after the passing of the judgment under appeal,

occasioning the delay in question.

Page 1 However, as rightly pointed out by the learned senior counsel,

appearing for the contesting respondents, the details furnished merely show how

the authorities concerned were pushing paper. It is well settled that bureaucratic

red tape and administrative delays are not grounds in themselves to condone

delay.

Mr. N. Kumarjit, learned Advocate General, Manipur, would however

contend that the aforesaid details reflect that there was no negligence as such on

the part of the authorities and there was no willful lack of care causing such delay.

This Court would normally not be inclined to accept usual red tape as a

tenable ground to overlook delay on the part of the authorities. However, given

the detailed explanation with regard to how the delay occurred and as the

judgment sought to be appealed against has financial implications affecting the

public exchequer, we are inclined to condone the delay on terms.

The application is accordingly ordered, condoning the delay of 221 days

in the presentation of the appeal upon payment of costs of `. 2000/- (Rupees

Two Thousand only) to the respondents. Respondent No. 1 shall receive the

costs on behalf of the other respondents and execute due acknowledgment.

A copy of this order shall be supplied online or through whatsapp to the

learned counsel for the parties.

                     JUDGE                       CHIEF JUSTICE
Sandeep




                                                                              Page 2