HAMELA KHATUN Vs. ASHMA KHATUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant; Mr. K.R. Patgiri, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1; Mr. J.P. Chauhan, learned standing counsel, Elementary Education, appearing for respondent Nos.2, 4 and 6 and Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate, appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 5.

(2.) The instant application is filed by the applicant seeking condonation of delay of 1122 days in filing the accompanying appeal. The applicant herein was the respondent No.6 in WP(C) No.2466/2013. The said writ petition was disposed of through the order dated 21.11.2014. The applicant claiming to be aggrieved by the said order passed by the learned Single Judge has preferred the accompanying appeal numbered as WA No.25/2018. Since there is delay of 1122 days in filing the appeal, the instant application is filed.

(3.) The respondents on being notified have opposed the application. The reason as assigned in the application is that the applicant had engaged the services of another counsel to represent her in the writ petition. It is indicated that in order to oppose the writ petition, she had also sworn an affidavit- in-opposition and furnished material to oppose the claim of the petitioner. The case of the applicant is that the learned counsel who had been engaged by her had not appeared before the Court when the matter had been taken up for consideration. It is stated in the affidavit that subsequently, advocate had not intimated about the result and she came to know of the writ petition being disposed of only when she had approached the office concerned to receive the pension amount.