RANCHI, India, Aug. 5 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on July 4:

1. This application is filed by the appellants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay of 767 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal challenging judgment dt. 22.11.2022 passed in W.P.(S) No. 800 of 2009 of the learned Single Judge.

2. In the application filed seeking condonation of delay, it is stated in that the judgment of the learned Single Judge was pronounced on 22.11.2022, and since financial issues were involved in the matter, the file was placed before the Finance Department for seeking its opinion in the matter; the Finance Department gave opinion to place the file before the Law Department for its advice; then advice of the Law Department was obtained, and the Law Department advised that no appeal having been filed by then against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, it has to be complied with.

3. It is stated that then the file was again sent to the Finance Department for consent and as per advice of the Finance Department, on the issue of pay scale of the Director, it was advised to take action as per rules.

4. Thereafter, certain contentions on the merits of the case have been raised in Para 8 to 11 of the application, and then it is stated that the file was again endorsed to the Finance Department for reconsideration of its advice, but the Finance Department did not reconsider the same. Thereafter, decision was taken to file the Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment dt. 22.11.2022 of the learned Single Judge and thus, delay of 767 days occurred.

5. We may point out that though the judgment of the learned Single Judge was pronounced on 22.11.2022, the Letters Patent Appeal was filed on 27.01.2025.

6. Also the certified copy of the judgment of the learned Single Judge was applied on 27.01.2025 and it was obtained on 31.01.2025. No explanation is offered as to why application for issuance of certified copy of the judgment of the learned Single Judge was not made for more than two years.

7. The various dates on which the file was placed before different Departments are not mentioned in the application seeking condonation of delay.

8. The applicants are undoubtedly aware that the Letters Patent Appeal is to be filed within 30 days from the date of judgment of the learned Single Judge, but there was no sense of urgency in the decision making process, and the file was leisurely moved from table to table, from department to department and from officer to officer.

9. This sort of conduct has been depreciated by the Supreme Court in several cases.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x%2BCm%2FM8M%2F%2BHsJ8EG02SiY902gjk8nHkXon%2FkR4xKrqoQ&caseno=LPA/235/2025&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010030422025&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.