Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Himachal Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10633 (HP)

STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER v. SANDEEP KUMAR VERMA

CMP.M/440/2025 · 2025-07-31

Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia, Ranjan Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

State of H.P. and another versus Sandeep Kumar CMP.M No. 440 of 2025 Item No.D-5 31.07.2025 Present: Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate General for the appellant. Mr. Dalip Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manish Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent. CMP.M No. 440 of 2025 Present application for condonation of delay for a period of 318 days has been filed by the State against the judgment dated 04.03.2024. The same has been opposed by filing reply by the writ petitioner-respondent herein. 2. A perusal of the application would go on to show that the judgment was passed on 04.03.2024 in CWPOA No.904 of 2019, certified copy was applied on 14.03.2024 which was prepared and attested on 01.04.2024. The judgment was received in the office of Advocate General on 03.04.2024 vide letter dated 29.04.2024 and referred to the Government for examination on 21.08.2024. The Government vide letter dated 14.10.2024 conveyed the advice of Law Department which was received on 18.10.2024 by the Engineer-in-Chief, Jal Shakti Vibhag, Tutikandi, Shimla, whereafter grounds of the LPA were drafted on 01.03.2025 and LPA was filed on 5.3.2025. The delay, as such, occurred of 318 days, as per the office report. 3. In the reply, it has been mentioned that there is lapse of four months initially and the matter was sent on 21.08.2024 and thereafter another five months had been taken after the advise of the Government have been received by the Engineer-in- Chief on 18.10.2024, and the appeal was filed in March, 2025. 4. In view of above, sufficient cause has been shown as the file has been moved from various departments, as such, and keeping in view the judgment in State of Nagaland versus Lipok AO and others (2005) 3 SCC 752, whereby it has been held that Government works with its hand tied, as such. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that sufficient cause has been made for condoning the delay. Accordingly, application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 5. The application stands disposed of. LPAST No.12034 of 2025 Appeal be registered. 6. Notice. Mr. Manish Sharma, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. 7. List the matter on 16th September, 2025. 8. It is fairly submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the respondent that in the meantime execution proceedings will not be pressed before the learned Single Judge. (G. S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice 31st July, 2025 (Ranjan Sharma) [himani/Shivender] Judge