Manipur High Court
Y.S. Sandhu vs Union Of India & 2 Ors on 6 May, 2024
NINGOM Digitally signed
by NINGOMBAM
BAM VICTORIA
Date: 2024.05.09
VICTORIA 13:15:41 +05'30' DB Item No. 35
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
MC(WA) No. 4 of 2024
Y.S. Sandhu.
...Applicant
- Versus -
Union of India & 2 Ors.
...Respondents
B EF O R E
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GOLMEI GAIPHULSHILLU KABUI
ORDER
06-05-2024
Siddharth Mridul (C.J.),
[1] Mrs. G. Pushpa, learned counsel, appears for the applicant and
Mr. S. Samarjeet, learned Sr. PCCG, appears for the respondents.
[2] The present application has been instituted on behalf of
Shri Y.S. Sandhu, aged about 77 years, who was at the relevant time serving
as Inspector in the 27th Bn. CRPF and is presently residing at Gurudwara,
Imphal, Thangal Bazar, Imphal West District, Manipur, praying as follows:--
"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to:-
1. Pass an Order allowing the present application by condoning the
delay of total 176 days taken in filing the accompanying Writ Appeal while
challenging the impugned Judgment and Order dated 24/07/2023
passed in W.P.(C) No. 58 of 2018, which in fact would render only 142
days deducting the 30 days statutory period along 4 days' time taken in
obtaining a certified copy when the same would be counted from the day
the appellant actually come across the impugned Judgment and Order.
Or/And,
For passing an order for condoning the delay of 22 days counting from
the date of knowledge i.e. w.e.f. 24/12/2023 till the date of filing of the
Memo of Appeal.
2. Pass any further order/orders direction/directions which this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and
circumstances of the Case."
[3] It is an admitted position that the elderly applicant was bedridden
from 07-07-2023 and received treatment of PTCA/stent to LAD.
[4] It is in this backdrop that the applicant was able to assail the
impugned judgment and order dated 24-07-2023 passed in WP(C) No. 58
of 2018 albeit belatedly, i.e. beyond the period of limitation prescribed by
law.
[5] Although, Mr. S. Samarjeet, learned Sr. PCCG appearing on
behalf of the respondents opposes the present application, as aforestated,
however, he does not contest the circumstance that the elderly applicant
was bedridden owing to his heart condition.
[6] In view of the foregoing and in the interest of justice, we are
satisfied that the applicant is able to demonstrate sufficient cause for
condoning the delay in filing the accompanying writ appeal. The application
is accordingly allowed and the delay of 176 days in filing the accompanying
writ appeal is condoned.
[7] The Registry is directed to number the writ appeal, if it is otherwise
found to be in order and list the same for admission.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Victoria
