The Patna High Court dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal by an appellant challenging a single Judge order terminating his appointment as a Constable. The court rejected the appeal as barred by limitation.
Appeal and interlocutory application summarily rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.146 of 2013 In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 175 of 2004 With
Interlocutory Application No. 919 of 2013 In
Letters Patent Appeal No. 146 of 2013
====================================================== Ravi Kumar Das S/O Late Bhavesh Chandra Das resident of villageDhouni, P.S.- Tarapur, District- Munger.
.... .... Petitioner/Appellant
Versus
.... .... Respondents/ Respondents
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent-State: Md. Anis Akhtar, A.C. to G.A. 3
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
3 19-02-2013 Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 1st July 2010 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 175 of 2004, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.
It appears that the appellant, though was not eligible for appointment as police Constable, was appointed as such under the dictate of the then Director General of Police. His service was,
Patna High Court LPA No.146 of 2013 (3) dt.19-02-2013
2 / 2
therefore, terminated on 26th September 2003. The challenge to the order of dismissal in CWJC No. 175 of 2004 has failed. Therefore, this Appeal.
The Appeal is filed two years and 116 days after the expiry of the period of limitation.
We see no merit in this Appeal nor the appellant has made any cause much less a sufficient cause for not filing the Appeal within the period of limitation. The Appeal and the application are summarily rejected.
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
Sujit/-
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a Letters Patent Appeal filed beyond the period of limitation can succeed?
Whether sufficient cause exists to condone the delay in filing the appeal?
Ravi Kumar Das
State of Bihar
The Chief Justice
Ahsanuddin Amanullah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
