These applications are filed praying for condoning the delay caused in filing the first appeals.
Learned advocate for the applicant submits that as the opinion of the Government Pleader of the concerned district was submitted to the Legal Department for challenging the award passed by the Reference Court, the acquiring body i.e. the applicant was under the bonafide impression that necessary steps have been taken by the State for preferring the appeal and so the applicant did not apply for the certified copy of the award as well as did not file appeal against the impugned order.
Learned advocate Mr.Raval for the opponents submits that it was within the knowledge of the acquiring body i.e the applicant that award is passed and in spite of that the acquiring body has not asked for certified copy within the period of limitation and subsequently after long lapse of time, the appeals are filed along with these applications for condonation of delay. He relied on the judgment in the case of Postmaster General and others V/s Living Media India Limited and Another, reported on (2012)3 SCC 563.
Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the judgment cited by learned advocate for the respondent. In the case of Postmaster General and others (supra), the government did not apply for certified copy within the period of limitation and did not file appeal within the period of limitation and considering this fact, the Apex Court rejected the application for condonation of delay. In the case on hand, though the opinion for preferring appeal was sent from the office of Government Pleader of the concerned District Court to the Legal Department, the State Government did not prefer appeal and, therefore, the acquiring body i.e. the present applicant is constrained to file appeals with delay condonation applications.
In view of the above, these applications are allowed. Delay caused in filing first appeals is condoned. Rule is made absolute.
( M.D.Shah, J ) srilatha Top