Orissa High Court
Managing Committee Of vs State Of Odisha & Ors on 15 April, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
FAO No. 603 of 2024
Managing Committee of ..... Appellants
Saraswati Vidyapitha, Mr. B. Behera, Advocate
Sundargarh & Ors.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Respondents
Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
15.04.2025
Order No.01 I.A. No. 1053 of 2024
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard Mr. B. Behera, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant
and Mr. P.K. Panda, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the
State-Respondents.
3. This Application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of
1773 days in filing the appeal in question.
4. It is contended that even though the GIA case was disposed of on
12.12.2019, but the Appellant was not aware about the disposal of the
order and after coming to know about the same only on 28.09.2023 the
Appellant immediately consulted with the Advocate and filed the
appeal on 30.09.2023. Accordingly, it is contended that the delay in
filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate rather it is
bonafide one and the same be condoned.
5. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the Respondents
contended that the delay in filing the appeal has not been properly
explained by showing sufficient cause and in view of the decision of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Postmaster General & Ors. Vs.
Living Media Ltd. & Anr. ((2012) 3 SCC 563) and the decision of this
Court in State of Odisha & Ors. Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack II
(W.P.(C) No. 15763 of 2021), the delay is not required to be condoned.
5.1. This Court after going through the grounds taken in the Petition
finds that the delay in filing the appeal has not been properly explained
by showing sufficient cause and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Postmaster General & Ors. Vs. Living
Media Ltd. & Anr. ((2012) 3 SCC 563) and the decision of this Court
in State of Odisha & Ors. Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack II (W.P.(C)
No. 15763 of 2021), the delay is not required to be condoned.
5.2. Hon'ble Apex Court in Para 27 and 29 of the Judgment in the case
of Postmaster General & Ors. has held as follows:-
"27. It is not in dispute that the person(s) concerned were well aware
or conversant with the issues involved including the prescribed period
of limitation for taking up the matter by way of filing a special leave
petition in this Court. They cannot claim that they have a separate
period of limitation when the Department was possessed with
competent persons familiar with court proceedings. In the absence of
plausible and acceptable explanation, we are posing a question why the
delay is to be condoned mechanically merely because the Government
or a wing of the Government is a party before us.
29. In our view, it is the right time to inform all the
government bodies, their agencies and instrumentalities
that unless they have reasonable and acceptable
explanation for the delay and there was bona fide effort,
there is no need to accept the usual explanation that the file
was kept pending for several months/years due to
considerable degree of procedural red tape in the process.
The government departments are under a special obligation
to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and
commitment. Condonation of delay is an exception and
should not be used as an anticipated benefit for the
government departments. The law shelters everyone under
the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a
few."
5.3. Similarly this Court in the case of State of Odisha & Ors in Para
-5 has held as follows:-
"5. The Supreme Court has recently in a series of matters reiterated that
the explanation usually offered by the State and its entities for the delay
on account of administrative exigencies should not be accepted unless
they are shown to be justified. A sampling of such orders is as under:
(i) Order dated 13th January 2021 in SLP No.17559 of 2020
(State of Gujarat v. Tushar Jagdish Chandra Vyas &
Anr.)
(ii) Order dated 22nd January 2021 in SLP No.11989 of 2020
(The Commissioner of Public Instruction & Ors. v.
Shamshuddin)
(iii) Order dated 22nd January 2021 in SLP No.25743 of 2020
(State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors v. Sabha Narain & Ors.)
(iv) Order dated 4th February 2021 in SLP No.19846 of 2020
(Union of India v. Central Tibetan Schools Admin &
Ors)
(v) Order dated 11th January 2021 in SLP No.22605 of 2020
(The State of Odisha & Ors v. Sunanda Mahakuda)"
6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and placing
reliance on the decisions as cited (supra), this Court does not find any
sufficient cause pleaded by the Appellant for condoning the delay in
question. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay in
filing the appeal and dismiss the I.A accordingly.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge
1. Since this Court is not inclined to condone the delay in filing the
appeal, the appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Digitally Signed Judge
Sneha
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 01-May-2025 12:54:47
