Managing Director, Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Limited, Dehradun vs Vipin Kumar And Others

S.K. Mishra, J

The appellant has filed an application for condonation of delay of 915 days in preferring the present Special Appeal against the judgment dated 09.05.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge. The Office has pointed out that there is a delay of 280 days. However, such an Office Note is incorrect in view of the fact that the limitation began on 09.05.2019 and expired on 08.06.2019. The Stamp Reporter has noted that in view of the order dated 10.01.2022, passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, the period from 15.03.2020 to 20.12.2021 has to be excluded, and delay from 08.06.2019 to 14.03.2020 is of 280 days. This report is incorrect as the limitation expired on 08.06.2019, and the subsequent order, in view of the COVID-19 pandemic, passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2020, will not revive the limitation, which has already expired. So there is a delay of 915 days in preferring the present Special Appeal.

We have carefully heard Mr. Neeraj Garg, the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents, as well as perused the records. We are of the opinion that on 09.05.2019, the appellant was represented by a learned counsel, and in his presence the order was passed by the learned Single Judge. So, there is a sufficient communication of the said order.

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that, after receipt of the notice of contempt, they have filed a review application, in which the delay was condoned by the learned Single Judge and, therefore, the delay in preferring the present Special Appeal should also be condoned.

The law is well settled that whenever sufficient cause is shown by a litigant indicating the reasons for delayed filing of any Petition or Appeal, the delay shall be condoned, and not otherwise.

In this case, no sufficient reasons have been shown to condone the delay. Hence, we are of the opinion that there are no plausible reasons to condone the delay. Hence, the application for condonation of delay is, hereby, dismissed.

Since the present Special Appeal is filed with a delay of 915 days, the same is not maintainable as it is barred by limitation. Accordingly, the Special Appeal is, hereby, dismissed.

In sequel thereto, all pending applications also stand disposed of.

Urgent copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel for the parties, as per Rules.