TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 952X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The impugned order was made on 10th March 2016. Even the final order by the Tribunal was made on 21st November 2017. This petition was however, instituted only on 29th September 2018. There is absolutely no explanation for inordinate delay in the institution of the petition - petition dismissed. - WRIT PETITION NO. 14391 OF 2018 - - - Dated:- 14-6-2019 - M.S. SANKLECHA, AND M.S.SONAK, JJ. Mr. A.K. Prabhakar a/w. Mr.Jay Lathiyara I/b KPS Legal for the Petitioner. Mr. Sham Walve with Mr. Ram Ochani for the Respondents. PC 1] Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2] The challenge in this petition is to the following orders: (i) Order-in-Original dated 10.03.2016 passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of India anr. 2018 TIOL-484-HC-AP-CX-LB. 5] The two Full Benches have in fact held that even in a petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, High Court, should not condone the delay beyond period of 90 days in instituting the appeal before the Appellate Authority. Accordingly, there is absolutely no merit in the challenge as to the orders dated 25th May 2017 and 21st November 2017. 6] Mr. Prabhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner, however presses the challenge to the order-in-original dated 10th March 2016 by relying upon the aforesaid Full Bench decisions. 7] In Panoli Intermediate (India) Pvt. Ltd. (surpa) the Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court was dealing with a reference. At para ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the power is there even in aforesaid circumstances, but the exercise is discretionary which will be governed solely by the dictates of the judicial conscience enriched by judicial experience and practical wisdom of the judge. (emphasis supplied) 8] In Electronic Corporation of India Limited (supra), again, the Full Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh / Telangana, in a similar matter, has answered the reference, holding that a writ petition would lie against an order-in-original against which an appeal was filed and dismissed as time barred or no appeal had been preferred as it would have been time barred, provided sufficient grounds are made out warranting exercise of the power of judicial review under Article 226 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Panoli Intermediate (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra). At the highest, as the ground raised, may have warranted some examination the exercise of appellate jurisdiction, but not in exercise of powers of judicial review. In this case, the petitioner, delayed the institution of appeal and therefore, cannot expect that the this Court converts itself into an appeal court whilst exercising powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The contention as raised would require reevaluation and re-appreciation of factual position. Such an exercise cannot be undertaken in the exercise of limited jurisdiction of judicial review. 12] Besides, we find that the impugned order was made on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
