PREMLATA GUPTA AND 5 OTHERS v. LKO. DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THRU. ITS SECY. VIPIN KHAND LKO. AND ANOTHER
A227/4111/2025 · 2025-07-23
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 150734 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 150734 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42253 Court No. - 7 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4111 of 2025 Petitioner :- Premlata Gupta And 5 Others Respondent :- Lko. Development Authority Thru. Its Secy. Vipin Khand Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Kumar Jauhari,Indu Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Ratnesh Chandra Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the petitioners is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the respondent.
3. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 26.05.2025, whereby the appellate Court has condoned the delay in filing the appeal in exercise of powers under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act.
4. The contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that an appeal was filed challenging a judgment and order passed on 25.05.1993 without there being any plausible explanation in the delay condonation application, and the same has been allowed on payment of Rs. 25,000/- as cost.
5. When the present writ petition was filed, the counsel for the respondent had informed that the petitioners themselves had filed an application
seeking recall of the order dated 26.05.2025 before the appellate Court and this fact, which was material, was not disclosed in the writ petition.
6. On being confronted with the said fact, the matter was got adjourned and a supplementary affidavit has been filed today stating that the recall application, which was filed before the appellate Court, was got dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 18.07.2025.
7. Considering the materials on record, prima facie, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on two counts, firstly, for not disclosing the material fact of having filed an application seeking recall of the same order which was the subject matter challenged before this Court and secondly, because discretion has been exercised by the appellate Court, and merely because another view is possible, the same would not be a good ground for interference in the exercise of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
8. The petition stands dismissed. (Pankaj Bhatia, J) Order Date :- 23.7.2025 A.Dewal Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench