Gujarat High Court High Court

Jethasur vs Divisional on 22 September, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Jethasur vs Divisional on 22 September, 2010
Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Bankim.N.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/11018/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY No. 11018 of 2010
 

In


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 1644 of 2010
 

In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17268 of 2005
 

With


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 1644 of 2010
 

In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17268 of 2005
 

 
=========================================================

 

JETHASUR
R GADHAVI - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

DIVISIONAL
CONTROLLER - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
JS BRAHMBHATT for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 22/09/2010  
 
ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)

This
is an application for condonation of delay of 1727 days caused in
preferring Letters Patent Appeal to challenge the order passed on
5.10.2005 in Special Civil Application No.17268 of 2005.

2. The
appellant states that the delay is not intentional and that he came
to know about the order only when he went to the Divisional Office of
respondent on 24.11.2009 to get information about his retirement
benefits i.e. leave pay and settlement of arrears. It is not
substantiated by any material whatsoever. It is difficult to accept
the scanty grounds on which delay is sought to be explained. The
application for condonation of delay thus cannot be entertained.

3. It
is true that ordinarily the Court’s approach should be liberal as no
party is going to be benefitted by causing delay in pursuing the
matter but where no explanation is tendered and there is gross
neglect towards the cause of action, the Court should not be
instrumental in making an exception to a statutory provision. The
application for condonation of delay, therefore, stands dismissed.
Consequently, Letters Patent Appeal (Stamp) No.1644 of 2010 also
stands dismissed.

(A.L.

DAVE, J.)

(BANKIM
N. MEHTA, J.)

zgs/-

   

Top