Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010134782024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2191/2024 LAIBANAN PHONGLO S/O- LT. GABANG PHONGLO, R/O VILL.- NOBDI LANGTING, P.O.- HAJADISA, P.S.- MAIBANG, DIST.- DIMA HASAO, ASSAM, 788931 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6. 2:STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. DISPUR GHY- 6. 3:THE PR ACCOUNTANT GENERAL A and E ASSAM GUWAHATI- 781029 DIST.- KAMRUP M. 4:THE SENIOR ACCOUNTS OFFICER OFFICE OF THE PR ACCOUNTANT GENERAL A and E ASSAM GUWAHATI- 781029 DIST.- KAMRUP M. 5:THE UNDER SECY. E TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM IRRIGATION DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 DIST.- KAMRUP M ASSAM. Page No.# 2/5 6:THE CHIEF ENGINEER DEPTT. OF IRRIGATION GOVT. OF ASSAM GHY- 3 DIST.- KAMRUP M ASSAM. 7:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER NORTH N.C. HILLS DIVISION IRRIGATION MAIBANG ASSAM. 8:THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PENSION and PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT. KAMRUP M DISPUR GHY- 6 ASSAM For the applicant : Mr. P.J. Saikia, Advocate For the respondents : Ms. D.S. Neog, Advocate For respondent Nos.1, 5, 6 Mr. A. Chaliha, S.C., Finance For respondent No.2 Mr. C. Boruah, Advocate For respondent Nos.3 & 4 Mr. C. Sharma, Advocate for Respondent No.7 Mr. R.K. Borah, Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam for Respondent No.8 Page No.# 3/5 – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI 27-01-2025 (Vijay Bishnoi, C.J.) This interlocutory application is filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 with the prayer to condone the delay of 1633 days in filing the connected writ appeal. 2. Notices of the interlocutory application have been served upon all the respondents and the learned counsel have put in appearance on behalf of the respective respondents. 3. The impugned order which is under challenge in the connected writ appeal was passed on 24.10.2017 in WP(C) 193/2016. 4. In the application, the applicant has contended that WP(C) 193/2016 was preferred on the advice of one of the staff serving under Executive Engineer, N.C. Hills (Irrigation). However, the name of the said staff is not disclosed. It is stated that on transfer of the said staff from the aforesaid office, he lost his contact with him and therefore, he was not aware about the fate of WP(C) 193/2016, which was dismissed on 24.10.2017. The applicant has further stated that on account of Covid-19 pandemic from 2020 to 2022, he was not able to move out of the place of residence and in the meantime, he also lost his son and daughter and was running in a bad phase. It is also stated that due to the above situation and financial helplessness, he failed to approach this Court within time. Page No.# 4/5 5. As per the death certificates annexed with this application, it appears that the son and the daughter of the applicant died on 23.03.2020 and 18.11.2021. 6. It is further stated that after the death of his son and daughter, the applicant almost became mad but no such documentary proof regarding his ill mental condition is placed on record. 7. The applicant has also stated that in the month of September, 2022, he met one of his colleagues and on enquiry made by the said colleague regarding his retiral benefits, the applicant decided to approach this Court and thereafter, he approached the Lawyer at Guwahati and filed WP(C) 7433/2022 without disclosing the fact that he had earlier approached this Court by way of filing WP(C) 193/2016. When the said fact was brought to the notice of the Court, the applicant made a prayer for withdrawal of WP(C) 7433/2022 and then only he came to know that his earlier writ petition had been dismissed. 8. The above facts mentioned by the applicant in paragraph 5 of the present application are unbelievable and it appears that the same is made by the applicant only with the intention to get the delay in filing the connected writ appeal condoned. It is to be noticed that the son and the daughter of the applicant died in March, 2020 and November, 2021 and even after passing of long time of their death, the applicant has approached this Court in June, 2024 only. Though it is stated by him that his mental condition was not good but as observed earlier no document in relation to his mental illness has been filed. 9. The applicant has filed the connected writ appeal along with the interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act only on 28.06.2024. Though the factum of dismissal of the earlier writ petition came to Page No.# 5/5 the knowledge of the applicant on 22.09.2023 when WP(C) 7433/2022 was dismissed, the delay in filing the connected writ appeal after passing of the order dated 22.09.2023 has also not been explained. 10. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the applicant has failed to explain the delay in filing the connected writ appeal satisfactorily. 11. For our satisfaction, we have also gone through the order dated 24.10.2017 passed in WP(C) 193/2016 and it appears that the applicant approached the Writ Court with the grievance that the respondents were not counting the three years period when the applicant had worked as Muster Roll employee for the purpose of grant of pensionary benefits to him. The learned Single Judge having considered the said claim of the applicant has concluded that even if the said initial three years of service of the applicant as Work- Charged Helper are counted, then also he would not complete twenty years of service period which is essential for grant of pension as per the Assam Pension Rules, 1969. 12. In such circumstances, we are of the view that on merit also the applicant has failed to make out any case. Hence, this interlocutory application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the connected writ appeal, which is yet to be registered, are dismissed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant