H N BHARALI Vs. LILY MARBANIANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case, the petitioner filed an application under Rule 36-A of the Administration of Justice and Police in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills 1937 assailing the order dated 11. 07. 2006 passed by the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shillong in TCA No. 3 (T) 2006 affirming the judgment and order dated 23. 06. 2003 passed by the learned Assistant to Deputy Commissioner, Shillong in TS 2 (T) 1993. After filing the application, apparently as a matter of abundant caution, the petitioner filed this application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning a delay of 7 days in filing the said application.

(2.) I have heard Mr. K. Khan, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. VGK Kynta, the learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) I have carefully gone through the explanation of the delay stated in the application. I have also perused the written objection against the prayer for condonation. The first point for determination is whether there is a period of limitation for revision under Rule 36-A. In my opinion, a comparative reading of the provisions of appeal and revision mentioned in Rule 36-A of the Administration of Justice etc. (Khasi and Jaintia Hills) Rules 1937 will show that there is no period of limitation for revision. For better appreciation of the controversy, the provisions of Rule 36-A is reproduced hereinbelow :