STATE OF BIHAR Vs. RAMESH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these appeals are against a common judgment and order and accordingly the same are considered together and decided by this common judgment.

(2.) THE present Letters Patent Appeals are against the order dated 10th July, 1998 passed in F.A. Nos. 414/95, 422/95, 423/ 95, 424/95, 426/95, 427/95 & 428/95 whereby and under the applications filed to condone the delay in filing the said appeals were dismissed principally on the ground that on similar facts and circumstances another First Appeal registered as F.A. No. 248/95 was filed, wherein also an application for condonation of delay was filed, which was rejected by an order dated 4th August, 1997. The learned Judge though discussed the law applicable to the subject, but did not consider the facts to which such law could be applied. The learned Judge did not record that the application contained any unexplained delay. The principal ground, therefore, to refuse discretion to condone the delay was the order dated 4th August, 1997 passed in F.A. No. 248/95.

(3.) IN such view of the matter there is hardly any scope of interference, but it appears that in respect of a land acquisition matter pursuant to a notification, many appeals were preferred by the Appellant -State simultaneously. One of them registered as F.A. No. 438/95 was also filed after expiry of time to prefer the appeal and, accordingly, an application for condonation in preferring the said appeal was filed, which was allowed by an order dated 30th April, 1997. Unfortunately this order dated 30th April, 1997 was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge when the learned Single Judge passed the order under appeal. If the said order had been brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge, we think that the learned Judge may have had taken a different view.