HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8905 of 2025 Court No. - 30 HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Sri S.S.Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for Respondents No. 1 to 3 and Sri Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel for Respondent no.4. 2. The captioned writ petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing therein, the order dated 24.05.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Devi Patan Division, Gonda in Case No.727 of 2025 (Computerised Case No.C202508000000727), under Section 207 of the U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901, Swami vs. Bachhraj and Ors; whereby the application of the petitioner for condonation of delay in filing the appeal had been rejected and consequently the appeal had also been dismissed. 3. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that while filing the appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Devi Patan Division, Gonda, an application for condonation of delay was also filed wherein, reason for not filing appeal within time was shown that the petitioner was seriously ill. 4. It has further been contended that the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Devi Patan Division, Gonda had rejected the application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioner only on the ground that in the application though he has stated that he was ill but no documents regarding illness have been filed. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sheo Shankar Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Pankaj Gupta Swami .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lko. And Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was seriously suffering from Jaundice (hyperbilirubinemia) and in that regard he has brought on record the medical prescriptions contained in annexure no.7 at page nos 39-40 of the writ petition. 6. It has further been argued that the medical prescriptions categorically demonstrate that the petitioner was seriously ill, therefore there was enough cause with the petitioner for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The Additional Commissioner, Administration, Devi Patan Division, Gonda, only for the reason that documents were not on record, had rejected the application for condonation of delay,therefore, the order impugned in this writ petition is not sustainable. 7. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the State- respondent has opposed this writ petition and has submittted that once the documents regarding illness of the petitioner were not on record before the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Devi Patan Division, Gonda then he had rightly rejected the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 8. I have considered the rival arguments advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and I find that there was delay of about a year in filing the appeal and the petitioner, while filing the appeal, has filed an application for condonation of delay and in that application he had categorically stated that because of his illness he could not file the appeal with in time. 9. This Court is of the view that the matters of condonation of delay in filing the appeals are to be dealt with leniency to subserve the cause of substantial justice and in the present case though the petitioner could not file documents relating to his illness before the appellate authority but he has brought on record the medical prescriptions before this Court to show that he was actually ill. 10. This Court is of the view that in the present matter, the petitioner's appeal had been dismissed only for non filing of the documents of his illness but now the documents of his illness have been put-forth before this Court, therefore, it is in the interest of justice that the application for WRIC No. 8905 of 2025 2 condonaton of delay may be heard again by the Appellate Authority. 11. Keeping in view the over all facts and circumstances of the case and particularly that the substantiate justice may not suffer, this writ petition is allowed. 12. The impugned order dated 24.05.2025, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Devi Patan Division, Gonda in Case No.727 of 2025 (Computerised Case No.C202508000000727), is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the Additional Commissioner, Administration, Devi Patan Division, Gonda to consider and decide the petitioner's application for condonation of delay afresh and if he comes to the conclusion that the delay is liable to be condoned, he may proceed to hear and decide the appeal on merit. September 16, 2025 Shahnaz WRIC No. 8905 of 2025 3 (Manjive Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench