AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.C. Patel, C.J.
CM Nos. 5291 and 5292/2005
Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.
CM Nos. 5293 and 5290/2005 and LPA No. 697/2005
This is an application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act for condensation of delay of 56 days in filing the appeal. In para 5 it is stated as under:-
"That the wife of appellant was to be hospitalised as she was seriously ill memory and the appellant could not file the Letters Patent Appeal within the stipulated period by 30.11.2004 and the same was filed on 18.12.2004 resulting in delay of 56 days."
There are no details nor any documents in support are placed on record. It is a vague argument. It is the duty of the appellant to give dates as to when his wife was admitted to the hospital, when she was discharged and whether there was some one to look after her or not. It is difficult to know whether she was admitted to the hospital prior to the decision or subsequent to the decision. In view of this, the delay is not required to be condoned. That apart, an application, being CM No. 5293/2005 has been preferred for condoning delay of 38 days in refiling, Even in that application no dates are given as to when the papers were handed over to the counsel, when enquiries were made about loss of file or when the papers were relocated by endeavor.
A vague averment is made that the papers were misplaced. The delay cannot be condoned.
However, we have examined the matter on merits and we find that the appellant was on probation for a period of two years, that period not having completed and as the promotion being ad hoc, he was reverted back to his original position in view of the reinstatement of one Harpal Singh pursuant to the order made by the Apex Court. In view of this, we find no reason to entertain the appeal. Hence, CM Nos. 5290 and 5293/2005 and the appeal are dismissed.