The State of Jharkhand Vs Shivajee Sharma

¶1

2025:JHHC:14477-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

I.A. No. 616 of 2021

¶4

In/And

¶5

L.P.A. No. 45 of 2021

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District- Ranchi

¶8

Under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District- Ranchi .. ... ... Appellants

¶9

Versus

¶10

Shivajee Sharma, son of Late Thakur Singh, resident of A/228, P.C. Colony, P.O.-Patna-2-800020, P.S.- Kankarbagh, District-Patna (Bihar)

¶11

Accountant General, officiating from the office of the Accountant General, P.O. and P.S. Doranda, District-Ranchi

¶12

… ... Respondents

¶13

¶14

CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶15

--------For the Appellants : Mr. Vishal Kumar Rai, A.C. to G.A.-IV For the Respondents: Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate

¶16

¶17

Reserved on: 28.04.2025 Pronounced on: 5/06/2025 Per M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.

¶18

1) The instant interlocutory application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 by the applicants to condone the delay of 490 days in filing this appeal challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge pronounced on 29.8.2019 in W.P.(S) No. 3766 of 2010.

¶19

2) In the application filed seeking condonation of delay, it is contended that after the judgment of the learned Single Judge in the writ petition became available, steps were taken by the applicants and opinion was secured for filing of the Letters Patent Appeal before this Court. It is

¶20

-1 of 3- L.P.A. No. 45 of 2021

¶21

2025:JHHC:14477-DB

¶22

stated that once instruction was given to prepare grounds of appeal, the same was prepared without any further delay and the Letters Patent Appeal was filed.

¶23

3) No dates have been given in the application filed seeking condonation of delay as to when the judgment of the learned Single Judge was secured, when the decision to file an appeal was taken and about the events in between.

¶24

4) The judgment of the learned Single Judge was pronounced on 29.8.2019 in the presence of the counsel for the applicants. They are therefore aware of the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Yet, application for issuance of certified copy of the judgment of the learned Single Judge was made on 9.1.2020 and it was obtained on 15.1.2020 but the appeal is filed on 30.1.2021.

¶25

5) Though some portion of this period is covered by the Covid-19 pandemic, we may point out that at least for the period from 29.8.2019 till 20.3.2020 (when the Covid-19 Lockdown commenced), there is no explanation for the delay.

¶26

6) In our opinion, though the applicants are aware that the time for filing the Letters Patent Appeal is only 30 days from the date of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, they were negligent in taking steps to file the Letters Patent Appeal.

¶27

7) So we hold that sufficient cause has not been shown by the applicants for condoning the inordinate period of delay of 490 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal.

¶28

-2 of 3- L.P.A. No. 45 of 2021

¶29

2025:JHHC:14477-DB

¶30