STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. RAM NAYAN YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sudeep Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Ranvijay Singh, learned Addl. C.S.C. for the appellant and Sri Sudhir Pandey and Sri Puneet Chandra, learned counsel for respondent No. 1.

(2.) These are two appeals one bearing Special Appeal Defective No. 345 of 2025 by the State challenging judgment and order dtd. 21/7/2023 passed in Writ-A No. 3696 of 2005. The other appeal bearing Special Appeal Defective No. 418 of 2024 is by the Committee of Management of the Institution. Both the appeals are belated. Special Appeal Defective No. 345 of 2025 has been filed with a delay of 533 days whereas Special Appeal Defective No. 418 of 2024 has been filed with a delay of 348 days. First of all, we may consider the explanation for the delay.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant-State had appeared and argued the matter before the writ court, so did the counsel for Committee of Management, meaning thereby, both the appellants were represented before the writ court, therefore, it is not a case where they did not know about the judgment. Now, we proceed to consider the explanation offered by the appellant-State in its appeal for filing it belatedly. But before doing so, we may mention that the limitation for filing special appeal under Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 is thirty days vide Chapter IX, Rule 10 of the Rules, 1952 read with Article 117 of the Schedule appended to the Limitation Act, 1963.