STATE OF J&K Vs. G. S. BAROCA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court accepting the respondent's writ petition. A preliminary objection has been taken by the respondent that the appeal is barred by time.

(2.) THE petition was accepted by the learned Single Judge on April 30, 1976, and the present appeal assailing the judgment of the learned Single Judge was filed on July 16, 1976, i. e. within 77 days from the date of the judgment. The respondent has raised the plea of limitation placing reliance upon R. 45 of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court Rules, 1975. R. 45 reads thus:

(3.) PRECISELY speaking the argument of Mr. A. D. Singh is that as R. 45 of the High Court Rules, 1975, which have been framed by the High Court in exercise of the powers vested in it under Clause 26 of the Letters Patent is inconsistent with Article 156-A of the Limitation Act inasmuch as it provides a different period of limitation from the one provided under Art 156-A, the rule is ultra vires of the powers of the High Court. According to the learned counsel, any rule which the High Court frames under Clause 26 of the Letters Patent must not run counter to any other provision contained in any other law for the time being in force, as would be borne out, according to the learned counsel, from the expression, "consistently with the law for the time being in force", employed in Clause 26 of the Letters Patent. In order to appreciate the contention raised by the learned Additional Advocate General, it is necessary to notice. S 29 of the Limitation Act. The relevant portion of which may be reproduced as below :-