In The High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Sitting At Lucknow Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14996-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 39 of 2025 Applicant :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Labour Lko. And 2 Others Opposite Party :- U.P. Rajkiya Ayudogic Prashishan Sansthan Dainik Vetan Karamchari Kalyan Samiti Thru. Its President Counsel for Applicant :- C.S.C. Hon’ble Attau Rahman Masoodi J. Hon’ble Subhash Vidyarthi J. C.M.An.No. 1 of 2025 (Application for Condonation Of Delay) 1. Heard the submission of Sri Indrajeet Shukla, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel in support of the application seeking condonation for delay in filing an application for review of the judgment and order dated 10.7.2014 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 339 of 2004. The stamp reporting Section had reported review application to be beyond time by 3139 days as on 28.02.2025 and the review application has been filed five days thereafter on 05.03.2025, with the delay of 3144 day. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay, it has been stated that the respondents had preferred Writ Petition No. 5683 (S/S) of 1995, which was allowed by means of a judgment and order dated 16.02.2004. The State had filed Special Appeal No. 339 of 2004 against the aforesaid order dated 16.02.2004 and the Special Appeal was partly allowed by means of a judgment and order dated 10.07.2014 whereby the judgment and order dated 16.02.2004 passed in the Writ Petition was modified. 3. Writ Petition No. 171 (S/S) of 2017 was decided on 08.01.2021 and the Writ Petition No. 20031 of 2021 was decided on 13.02.2023. Thereafter the Directorate passed an order regarding regularization of p. 1 the employees in October, 2023. The order of regularization was challenged in Writ Petition No. 9484 (S/S) of 2023 and other connected matters. Those Writ Petitions were allowed by means of a judgment and order dated 13.11.2024. When a legal opinion was sought from the office of the Chief Standing Counsel regarding the judgment dated 13.11.2024, an advise was given for filing an application for review of the judgment and order dated 10.07.2014 passed in Special Appeal No. 339 of 2004. It is thereafter that the review application was prepared and it was filed on 05.03.2025. 4. In the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay, it has been stated that the officers responsible at that point of time looking after legal affairs of the department, ought to have obtained a legal opinion regarding the judgment and order dated 10.07.2014 passed in Special Appeal No. 339 of 2004. However, no legal opinion was sought and the officers concerned misunderstood the observations made by this Court in the order dated 10.07.2014 and he took it to be an order for regularizing the services of the employees under the government order dated 13.08.2015, as the Rules of 1979 were inapplicable to the employees and many employees were ineligible even under the 1998 Rules. As such, the re- consideration was done by the department on account of a bona fide mistake, which was not aimed at disturbing the mandate issued by this Court in the order passed in Special Appeal No. 339 of 2004. 5. Generally, the courts adopt a liberal approach while examining the cause shown for delay in approaching this Court. When the State is the litigant, some latitude is provided to it keeping in view the fact that its affairs are managed by its officers/employees and there is possibility of bona fide mistakes committed by the officers which may result in some delay in filing appeals/applications by the State. However, when the order passed by this Court was well within the knowledge of the appellant and it was acted upon also, the delay of about a decade in filing an application for review of the order which already stands complied with, needs to be examined carefully p. 2 6. The only reason assigned for the delay of about a decade is that the department had not sought any legal opinion when the judgment dated 10.07.2014 was pronounced and the department had misunderstood the order and had complied with the same. Thereafter when some other writ petitions were filed, a need was felt for seeking of a review order. This does not make out a sufficient cause for condonation of an inordinate delay of 3144 days in filing the review application. 7. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay in filing the review application is rejected. 8. Consequently the review application is also consigned to records. (Subhash Vidyarthi J.) (A. R. Masoodi J.) Order Date: 11.03.2025 kanhaiya p. 3 Digitally signed by :- KANHAIYA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench