KAMLESHWAR NATH SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri B.P. Srivastava, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner -applicant, and Sri V.N. Agarwal, learned Standing Counsel for the State of U.P. representing the respondents.

(2.) AFTER the lapse of an interminable period of more than eight years, the petitioner -applicant seeks to have the order and judgment of the Court dated 12th October, 1993 reviewed.

(3.) THE Court has perused the averments made in support of the delay condonation application and has not been able to find any tangible ground muchless sufficient to condone the delay. The ground set up is that on 24th July, 2000, the petitioner -applicant came to enquire about the case and, on inquiry from the High Court office by the aforesaid registered Clerk, it was revealed that the petition had been dismissed on 12th October, 1993. On record there is neither any application for inspection of the record nor is there any application seeking information about the status of the case. In the absence of the inspection application and the application seeking information, or any other legal source of information, the assertion that the registered Clerk came to know about the order and judgment dated 12th October, 1993 from the High Court office is too good to be believed.