The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.A. No.706 of 2020 Pravat Kumar Panda …. Appellant Mr. S.N. Sharma, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & others …. Respondents
Legal Reasoning
Ms. S. Devi, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. MISHRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 16.07.2025 I.A. No.2155 of 2021 6. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The Stamp Reporter has calculated the delay of 399 days in filing the writ appeal. To explain the delay the petitioner has taken the grounds that he fell ill on 19.10.2019, as he was suffering from jaundice and severe gastritis and was under treatment of the doctor till 21.11.2020. He became fit on 22.11.2020 and resumed his normal duty. After recovering from the illness, the appellant contacted his lawyer and then the writ appeal was filed on 23.11.2020. It is further Page 1 of 5 stated in paragraph-4 of the condonation of delay application that the delay was neither intentional nor due to deliberate latches on the part of the appellant and the prayer has been made to condone the delay in the filing the appeal. In the application, a Certificate dated 22.11.2020 issued by the Homoeopathy Doctor has been filed, which simply mentions that the appellant was suffering from Jaundice with severe gastritis and was under his treatment from 19.10.2019 to 21.11.2020 and he became fit to perform his daily work on 22.11.2020. The respondent no.5 has filed an objection opposing the condonation of delay and it is stated in paragraph nos.- 4 and 5 which reads as under: “4. That, at the outset it is respectfully submitted that admittedly the Hon'ble single judge has disposed of the writ application vide its order dt.17.09.2019 and the present intra-court appeal has been preferred by the Appellant only on 23.11.2020, thereby the registry has pointed out the delay of 399 days occurred in presenting the appeal before this Hon'ble court. It is submitted that as can seen from the ground assigned in the aforesaid interim application, wherein the only and usual stand taken in para-2 and 3 that the Appellant fell ill on 19.10.2019 due to suffering from Jaundice with severe Gastritis and was undergone treatment till 21.11.2020, for which he has annexed a medical certificate which has purported to have been issued by one Private doctor namely Dr. Abdul Aziz Khan, whereby the Appellant was declared fit to perform his daily work w.e.f 22.11.2020. It is further submitted that apart Page 2 of 5 from the above stand, there is no other ground assigned in the condonation of delay application, but in this connection it is submitted that such a ground assigned in the limitation petition can never said to be sufficient cause as provided under the Limitation Act and as per the settled principle of law governing the field, since there is no sufficient cause assigned in the limitation petition, for which for condonation of delay is liable to be dismissed being devoid of any merit, consequently the writ appeal is also liable to be dismissed. interim application filed the 5. That it is submitted that admittedly there is gross inordinate and un-explained delay of 399 days in preferring the writ appeal, but the Appellant in a very casual manner filed the aforesaid I.A without assigning the sufficient cause which is the basic requirement while filing any application under Section-5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. It is submitted that it is the settled law as decided by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Postmaster General & Ors. Vrs. Living Media Ltd. & Anr. Reported in 2012 (3) SCC 563, State of M.P Vrs. Bherulal reported in 2020 (10) SCC 654, State of Odisha Vrs. Sunanda Mahakuda reported in 2021 (11) SCC 560, State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. Vrs. Sabha Narain & Ors. reported in 2022 (9) SCC 266 and State of Kerala Vrs. Akshaya Jewellers reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 1437, wherein the Hon'ble Apex court in all these cases have rejected the application filed u/s-5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in absence of any sufficient cause, and this Hon'ble court recently have also delivered a similar judgment in the case of Director Horticulture & Ors. Vrs. Sudhanshu Mohan Mohanty (W.A. No.1572 of 2022 disposed of on 26.03.2025) by rejecting the writ appeal on the ground of delay. Therefore in view of the aforesaid law governing the field, and by taking into consideration the ground stated in the limitation petition, the same cannot be said to be sufficient cause in the eye of law and moreover the delay caused in preferring the writ appeal has not at all properly explained, and accordingly the interim application filed by the Page 3 of 5 Appellant for condonation of delay is devoid of any merit and liable to be dismissed, consequently the aforesaid intra-court appeal is also liable to be dismissed. The Respondent No.5 reserves her right to produce the aforementioned case laws at the time of hearing.” The respondent no.4 has also filed an objection on the similar grounds. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a sympathetic view may be taken. However, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.4 and 5 placed reliance in the order dated 26.03.2025 of a Division Bench of this Court passed in I.A. No.3691 of 2022 in W.A. No.1572 of 2022, where prayer for condoning the delay of 320 days in filing the writ appeal was turn down. After taking into account the ratio laid down in various cases, this Court was not inclined to condone the delay in that case. After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties and going through the judgment placed by the learned counsel for the respondent nos.4 and 5 and the averments taken in the Interim Application, we are of the view that the petition for condonation of delay does not demonstrate sufficient/good cause to explain the delay and as such, this Court is not inclined to condone the inordinate delay in filing the Writ Appeal. Page 4 of 5 In view of the above discussions, the I.A. is dismissed. Consequently, the Writ Appeal also stands dismissed. Judge ( S.K. Sahoo) Subhasis Judge ( S.S. Mishra) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTY Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 16-Jul-2025 19:20:23 Page 5 of 5