STATE OF J & K Vs. KULSOOMA ARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Jammu and Kashmir has filed this application seeking the indulgence of this Court in condoning the delay of 442 days in filing the appeal, inter alia, on the grounds that after the receipt of the copy of the order/judgement dated 8th of November, 2017 passed by the learned single Judge in the petition filed by the respondent herein/ writ petitioner (SWP No.948/2016), the same was scanned at various levels to derive satisfaction on the count whether or not the appeal is to be filed. After going through the entire record of the case, the matter was referred to the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs for its views and the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, opined that an appeal be filed against the impugned order/judgement.

(2.) The applicants have proceeded to state that in this process, there was a delay of few months caused due to administrative exigencies. It has further been stated that the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, accorded sanction for filing of LPA vide its letter No. LD(LIT)2016/338- GAD dated 19th of December, 2018. After the receipt of the sanction from the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Mr M. A. Chashoo, AAG, appointed to file the LPA, swung into action and, immediately, called the record of the case and other documents from the applicants. It has further been pleaded that the appeal has an important bearing as far as the interests of the applicants are concerned and in case the delay in filing of appeal is not condoned, it will cause great prejudice to the applicants. It has further been averred that the settled position of law is that since the decisions at the Government level are taken at a slow pace, therefore, some amount of latitude has to be given to it and the Government cannot be equated and treated on par with the private parties in the matter of condonation of delay. The application is buttressed with an affidavit.

(3.) The respondent/ writ petitioner, present in person before this Court, submits that this application filed by the applicants is cryptic as there is no ground, much less a sufficient one, for the Condonation of Delay, therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed. The respondent/ writ petitioner has further stated that in view of the judgement dated 8th of November, 2017, the applicants/ respondents before the Writ Court was obliged to consider the respondent herein/ Writ petitioner and others in the waiting list as against the posts of RBA to be created upon shifting of one candidate from the RBA to the open merit category on account of their having merit for the appointment in the process of selection conducted for the post of FMPHW and pass requisite orders within three weeks from the date of receipt the copy of the said judgment. It is pleaded that the applicants did not do so and slept over the matter for a long time. In the end, it has been urged that the applicants have no case on merits and that in case the judgement dated 8th of November, 2017 is tampered or tinkled, the respondent/ Writ petitioner will not be able to harvest the fruits of litigation.