Narendra Pratap Singh and 2 Ors v. The State of Assam and 4 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010133142024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oI.A.(Civil)/2131/2024o NARENDRAoPRATAPoSINGHoANDo2oORS.o S/OoLATEoVISHWANATHoSINGH,oRETIREDoPROFESSOR,oKOKRAJHAR,o GOVERNMENToCOLLEGE,o(PREVIOUSLYoKOKRAJHARoCOLLEGE),oP.O.o ANDoDIST.oKOKRAJAHR,oASSAM. 2:oSURATHoNARZARY oS/OoLATEoPATHAKoCHANDRAoNARZARY o RETIREDoPRINCIPAL oKOKRAJHARoGOVT.oCOLLEGEo(PREVIOUSLYoKOKRAJHARoCOLLEGE) o oP.O.oANDoDIST.oKOKRAJHAR oASSAM. 3:oBELAoDAS oW/OoLATEoS.C.oDAS o RETIREDoHEADoOFoTHEoDEPARTMENT oDEPARTMENToOFoCHEMISTRY oKOKRAJHARoGOVT.oCOLLEGE o(PREVIOUSLYoKOKRAJHARoCOLLEGE oP.O.oANDoDIST.oKOKRAJHAR oASSAMo VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo4oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o EDUCATIONo(HIGHER)oDEPARTMENT,oASSAM,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATI-6. 2:THEoDIRECTORoOFoHIGHERoEDUCATION oASSAM oKAHILIPARA Page No.# 2/3 GUWAHATI -19. 3:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A AND E) ASSAM. 4:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION GOVT. OF ASSAM. 5:THE PRINCIPAL KOKRAJHAR GOVERNMENT COLLEGE KOKRAJHAR P.O. P.S. AND DIST.- KOKRAJHAR ASSAM For the applicants : Ms. A. Begum, Advocate For the respondents : Mr. N. Das, Govt. Advocate, Assam Mr. S. Das, S.C., Higher Education Mr. R.K. Talukdar, S.C., A.G.

– B E F O R E – HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR 08-11-2024 (Vijay Bishnoi, C.J.) The matter comes up for consideration of IA(Civil) 2131/2024 filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 with the prayer for condonation of delay of 443 days in filing the connected writ appeal against the judgment and order dated 21.03.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 620/2018. It is stated in the application that against the impugned judgment and order, the applicants have preferred a review petition before the learned Single Judge. However, the same was later on withdrawn. It is also stated that the applicants are old aged persons and on account of age related ailments, they were not prompt in filing the connected writ appeal. It is further stated that the Page No.# 3/3 applicant No.1 went to Bengaluru where his son is serving for urgent family affairs and he came back from Bengaluru only in the month of April, 2024 and then he contacted his counsel. It is, therefore, prayed that the delay in filing the connected appeal may kindly be condoned. Learned counsel for the respondents have opposed the application and argued that the delay in filing the connected writ appeal has not been explained satisfactorily. Therefore, the same cannot be condoned. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after taking into consideration the averments made in paragraph 8 of the application, we deem it appropriate to allow the prayer for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay of 443 days in filing the connected writ appeal is condoned. The interlocutory application is disposed of. Registry is directed to register the connected writ appeal and list the same before this Court after four weeks for admission.

JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant