Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana And Others vs Ashok Kumar Yadav on 15 March, 2024
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037787
CR No.3043 of 2019 (O&M) -1- 2024:PHHC:037787
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.3043 of 2019 (O&M)
Date of Order:15.03.2024
State of Haryana and others
.Petitioner
Versus
Ashok Kumar Yadav ..Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present: Mr. Jaspal Singh Pannu, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Kartikey Choudhary, Advocate
for Mr. Samrat Malik, Advocate
for the respondent.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J
1. Through this revision petition, the State of Haryana and its
officials assail the correctness of the first appellate court's order to condone
the delay of 175 days in filing the first appeal.
2. In order to comprehend the issue involved in the present case,
the relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed
3. The respondent filed a civil suit for the grant of decree of
declaration to the effect that the order dismissing him from service as a
measure of major punishment is wrong, illegal and arbitrary.
4. The civil court partly decreed the suit and directed the
authorities to pass any other order except the order of dismissal from service.
5. The first appeal was filed to challenge the aforesaid judgment
along with an application for condonation of delay on the following
grounds:-
"1. That the civil suit of the plaintiff has been decided on
12.12.2017 by the Hon'ble court of Sh. Ramawatar
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037787
CR No.3043 of 2019 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:037787
Pareek, Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Kanian.
2. That concerned assistant District Attorney, Kanina Court
has sent the comments of the present civil suit to the
Legal Remembrancer and Administrative Secretary to
Government Haryana, Law and Administrative Secretary
to Government, Haryana, Law and Legislative
Department, Chandigarh. The above said authority vide
his office memo No.63/17/Co. 18(67) 2018 dated
22.5.2018 has directed to the District Attorney that
appeal in the present case be filed in the Hon'ble First
appellate Court.
3. That today on 4.7.2018 appeal has been prepared and is
being filed after a delay of 175 days which was caused
on account of obtaining sanction from the Government as
well as from the concerned defendants."
6. The First Appellate Court has refused to condone the delay on
the ground that the State has failed to disclose as to when Assistant District
Attorney, Kanina Court, sent the comments to the Legal Remembrancer and
therefore it would not be appropriate to give blanket licence to the State to
file cases whenever it pleases.
7. The correctness of the aforesaid order has been challenged in
this revision petition.
8. It may be noted here that the first appeal is an important
enabling right available to the party to the suit to challenge the correctness
and legality of the judgment and decree passed by the trial court. The First
Appellate Court is the last court of fact and law both. It is expected that the
First Appellate Court will re-appreciate the evidence and decide the appeals
after thoroughly examining the facts available on the record and the
evidence led by the parties while applying the law. Hence, the efforts should
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:037787
CR No.3043 of 2019 (O&M) -3- 2024:PHHC:037787
be to decide the appeals on merits rather than on technicalities or defaults. If
the appeals are permitted to be decided for default or technical reasons, the
justice may suffer. Hence, the approach of the court should be pragmatic
and holistic. The State Government and the Public Sector Undertakings are
required to depend upon its officers and officials . Some time even those
officials collude with the litigants. In these circumstances, the court is
expected to be liberal in considering the request of the State or
instrumentalities to condone the delay. In this case, the First Appellate
Court has taken a very hyper technical view.
9. In the considered view of the court, it would be appropriate to
condone the delay in filing the appeal in the facts and circumstances of the
present case. Hence, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned order
passed by the Additional District Judge, on 01.02.2019, is set aside. The
first appeal filed by the State is restored to its original number with direction
to the First Appellate Court to decide the appeal within a period of next 9
months, from today.
10. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before
the First Appellate Court, on 15.04.2024.
11. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also
disposed of.
March 15, 2024 (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
nt JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :YES/NO
Whether reportable :YES/NO
3 of 3
