MOHD SALIM Vs. BHANU MATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have seen the office report dated 15. 12. 2008. Sri S. K. Misra appears for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and service of notice on respondent Nos. 4 to 6 is deemed to be sufficient under Rule 12 of Chapter VIII of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.

(2.) THIS appeal is barred by time one year and 54 days. The cause for not filing the appeal well within time has been explained in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the affidavit filed in support of application for condonation of delay. It appears that earlier the applicant/appellant has filed an appeal before this Court and that appeal was dismissed on 21. 3. 2007 on the ground that the appellant/applicant has already filed a review application for redressal of his grievance before the Tribunal. However, the liberty was given to the appellant to file an appeal in case review application is decided.

(3.) REFUTING the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S. K. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that review application was not maintainable before the Tribunal, therefore, the appellant/applicant has been pursuing a remedy not legally available hence, he deliberately delayed the filing of the appeal, therefore the application for condonation of delay should be rejected and appeal be dismissed as barred by time.