AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.N. Ravindran, J.—Heard.
This is an application to condone the delay of 221 days in filing the writ appeal. The writ appeal arises from the judgment delivered on 22-10-2009 in W.P(C) No. 31533 of 2006. A certified copy of the judgment was applied for on 26.10.2009 and the copy was delivered over to the learned Government Pleader on 18.11.2009. This writ appeal is filed on 18.6.2010 with a delay of 221 days. In the affidavit dated 15.6.2010 originally filed along with the application to condone delay, the only averment to explain the delay is as follows:
The impugned judgment is dated 22.10.2009 and the appeal ought to have been filed on 30.11.09. Due to administrative delay which had occurred for want of approval from the Law Department and thereafter from the SC/ST Department it had took some time to issue formal orders to file Writ Appeal. The delay had occurred due to administrative reasons. There is no willful laches or negligence on the part of the appellant in filing the Appeal in time.
When the application to condone the delay in filing the appeal came up for hearing before us on 29.6.2010 the learned Government Pleader took time to file a better affidavit explaining the delay. An affidavit dated 7-7-2010 sworn to by the very same officer who had sworn to the earlier affidavit has been placed on record. In para 2 thereof it is stated that a certified copy of the judgment in the writ petition forwarded by the learned Government Pleader who had appeared before the learned single Judge was received in the Department of Water Resources on 5.11.2009. It is also stated that thereupon the Government in Water Resources Department consulted with the Law Department on 20.11.2009 and the Law Department after careful examination returned the files on 31-12-2009 with the remark that there is no scope for filing an appeal. In paragraph 3 thereof it is stated that thereafter, as the case relates to the caste status of the petitioner, the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Department was also consulted on 25.1.2010 and that the remarks of that department were received by the Water Resources Department only on 8-6-2010. However, it is conceded that the said department had also opined that there is no scope for filing an appeal. It is in this background that the deponent explains the long delay of 221 days in filing the appeal.
It is evident from the averments in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the affidavit dated 7-7-2010 that the Law Department had after careful examination, returned the file on 31.12.2009 with the opinion that there is no scope for filing an appeal against the judgment of the learned single Judge. The reason stated by the Law Department is extracted in paragraph 2 of the affidavit and the same is extracted below:
The petitioner has got the benefit of Scheduled Caste on the basis of the Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950 prevailing at that time. It is only on 29th August, 2007 the said order has been amended and for the words Thandan under entry 61 the words "Thandan (excluding Ezhavas and Thiyyas who are known as Thandan in erstwhile Cochin and Malabar areas)" have been substituted. Since the amendment came into force only w.e.f. 29.08.2007 and the petitioner has got the benefits on the basis of order prevailing before 29/082007. It is not proper to state that the benefit obtained by the petitioner is not in order.
The files were thereafter forwarded to the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Department on 25.1.2010. That Department sat on the file for five months and thereafter forwarded their opinion on 7.6.2010 and it was received by the Water Resources Department on 8.6.2010. It is conceded that the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Department also concurred with the Law Department that there is no scope for filing an appeal. In our opinion as the Law Department had already opined that there is no scope for filing an appeal, it was quite unnecessary to obtain the opinion of yet another Department of the Government. The petitioner is an employee of the Water Resources Department. It was therefore not necessary to ascertain the opinion of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Department for deciding whether an appeal should be filed from the judgment of the learned single Judge.
We accordingly hold that no grounds have been made out to condone the delay in filing the appeal. The applications fail and are accordingly dismissed. Consequently the writ appeal also shall stand dismissed.