TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1514X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eral, pragmatic, justice-oriented, non-pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise injustice but are obliged to remove injustice. Substantial justice being paramount and pivotal the technical considerations should not be given undue and uncalled for emphasis. There is distinction between inordinate delay and a delay of short duration. In the present case, the appeal is only barred by 137 days. The State representing the collective cause should be given some acceptable latitude. Application disposed off. - W. A. No.617/2014 - - - Dated:- 5-8-2015 - P. K. Jaiswal And T. K. Kaushal, JJ. Shri Sunil Jain, learned A.A.G. with Shri P. Bhargava, learned Dy. A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n. It is submitted that the matter is sent to the Law Department, however, the permission is awaited in the matter and because of the delay caused in awaiting the permission the appeal is filed as per the order of the Collector dated 11.02.2014 (Annexure-C). Thereafter, the Officer in charge immediately collected the entire record of the case and contacted the office of Advocate General, at Indore where the record of the case was perused and appeal was drafted and same has been filed without any further delay. 3. After filing of reply by the respondents, an additional affidavit has been filed by the OIC of the case stating therein that vide letter dated 05.12.2013, the respondents informed the State Government about the passing of impugn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igence. He submits that there is no explanation for the period 08.01.2014 to 17.02.2014 (23 days), 17.02.2014 to 20.03.2014 (39 days), 28.03.2014 to 21.04.2014 (25 days) and no explanation for the period 11.02.2014 to 03.07.2014 and submitted that there was gross negligence and deliberate inaction on the part of the appellants and thus, the department cannot take advantage on account of impersonal machinery and inherited bureaucratic methodology of making several notes. To support the aforesaid, he has drawn our attention to Paras-28, 29 and 30 of the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Postmaster General and Others vs. Living Media India Limited and Another reported in 2012(3) SCC 563 and prays for rejection of the application. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
