Suresh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Suresh Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delay in filing the statutory appeal condoned subject to deposit of Rs.1,000/- as exemplary cost with the Allahabad High Court Bar Association within a week; respondent no.2 directed to decide the appeal on merits expeditiously, preferably within two months of presentation of the receipt of deposit along with certified copy of the order.

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of more than 12 years and 5 months in filing the petitioner's statutory appeal should be condoned and the appeal directed to be decided on merits, notwithstanding its rejection solely on the ground of laches.

Court's answer

Once a statutory right has come into existence in favour of the petitioner, it cannot be taken away merely on the ground of laches; the delay ought to be condoned by imposing some exemplary cost.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is permitted to deposit Rs.1,000/- with the Allahabad High Court Bar Association within a week; on placing the receipt of deposit along with the certified copy of the order before respondent no.2, the appeal is to be considered and decided on merits after condoning the delay, expeditiously and preferably within two months from presentation of the receipt and certified copy.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Condonation of delay — statutory appeal by Class-IV employee (safaikarmi) against Disciplinary Authority's order dated 09.01.2013 filed on 16.05.2025 after more than 12 years and 5 months — appeal dismissed by respondent no.2 (Deputy Director Panchayat Raj, Bareilly Mandal) on 31.01.2026 solely on the ground of laches — held, once a statutory right has come into existence in favour of the petitioner it cannot be cancelled only on the ground of laches; delay condoned subject to exemplary cost of Rs.1,000/- to be deposited with the Allahabad High Court Bar Association within a week — respondent no.2 directed to decide the appeal on merits expeditiously, preferably within two months of presentation of the deposit receipt with certified copy of the order (Prakash Padia, J.).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

WRIT - A No. - 5500 of 2026

Suresh Kumar

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Amit Khanna
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.

Court No. - 6

HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

Against the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority dated 09.01.2013 petitioner submitted a representation / appeal before the respondent no.2 namely Deputy Director Panchayat Raj Bareilly Mandal, District Bareilly on 16.05.2025 i.e., after more than 12 years and 5 months. The appeal was dismissed by the respondent no.2 vide its order dated 31.01.2026 on the ground of laches.

It is argued that petitioner is a Class-IV employee (safaikarmi) and due to unavoidable circumstances he was not able to file an appeal during the prescribed time. Hence, a prayer has been made to condone the delay in filing an appeal of the petitioner and direct the respondent no.2 to decide the appeal on merits.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

From perusal of the record it appears that appeal filed by the petitioner before the respondent no.2 is statutory in nature and the same was rejected only on the ground of laches.

In this view of the matter, the Court is of the opinion that once the statutory rights has been approved in favour of the petitioner the same could not be cancelled only on the ground of laches and the laches should be condoned by imposing some exemplary cost.

In this view of the matter, the petitioner is permitted to deposit the sum of Rs.1,000/- with the Allahabad High Court Bar Association within a

WRIA No. 5500 of 2026

2

week from today and petitioner should placed the receipt of deposit along-with the certified copy of this order before the Respondent no.2 namely Deputy Director Panchayat Raj Bareilly Mandal, District Bareilly. If it is so, the Respondent No.2 will consider and decide the appeal submitted by the petitioner on merits after condoning the delay in filing the same, expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from the date of presentation of receipt of amount along-with certified copy of this order.

(Prakash Padia,J.)

April 20, 2026 Swati

Digitally signed by :- SWATI PATHAK High Court of Judicature at Allahabad