CR-536-2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 278 CR-536-2022 Date of Decision: 25.03.2025 HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (NOW HSVP) AND OTHERS …..Peoners Vs GANESH KUMAR AND OTHERS …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present: Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for the peoners. Mr. Jai Singh Yadav, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 to 7. ****** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. Power of a%orney has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 7, whereas respondent No.1 is reported to have expired. 2. Arguments heard. 3. Peon under Secon 15(3) of the Payment Wages Act was filed by Ganesh Kumar and others (respondent herein), against Execuve Engineer, Sub Division, HUDA, Rewari and others (peoners herein). The respondents of the peon filed wri%en statement opposing the same. However, during proceedings before the concerned authority under the Payment of Wages Act, they were proceeded ex parte and ulmately, the order was passed against them on 11.07.2017 vide Annexure P-3. 4. Respondents of the main case i.e. peoners herein filed an appeal before District Court, Rewari. Along with the same, they moved an applicaon under Secon 5 of the Limitaon Act to condone the delay of 422 days in filing the appeal. That applicaon has been dismissed by learned Page 1 of 3 Pages PRIYANKA 2025.03.26 17:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-536-2022 Addional District and Sessions Judge, Rewari vide order dated 27.08.2021 and consequently, appeal was dismissed being barred by limitaon. 5. Now the aforesaid order dated 27.08.2021 along with the earlier order dated 11.07.2017 passed by the authority under the Payment of Wages Act, Rewari, have been assailed before this Court. 6. Learned counsel contends that there were jusfiable reasons to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Court and therefore, the delay should have been condoned and appeal should have been heard on merits. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that cogent reasons have been given by the First Appellate Court in refusing to condone the delay. 8. Having considered submission for both the sides, this Court does not find any merit in the peon. 9. Perusal of the applicaon, which was moved by the peoners under Secon 5 of the Limitaon Act to condone the delay of 422 days in filing the appeal, would reveal that they conceded the fact that they were being defended through Mr. Charan Choudhary, Advocate, who could not appear before the Court due to some unavoidable circumstances, due to which the peoners herein were not aware about the progress of the case. What were unavoidable circumstances, due to which the counsel for the peoners could not appear before the concerned authority under the Payment Wages Act, are not at all disclosed. Admi%edly, peoners had filed wri%en statement before the concerned authority and so, there was no jusficaon for them to remain absent and to be proceeded ex parte. 10. In the absence of any cogent grounds to condone the delay of 422 days in filing the appeal, this Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order dated 27.08.2021 by learned Addional District and Sessions Judge, Rewari, dismissing the applicaon under Secon Page 2 of 3 Pages PRIYANKA 2025.03.26 17:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-536-2022 5 of the Limitaon Act so as to condone the delay and consequently to dismiss the appeal being barred by limitaon. 11. As such, holding the revision to be devoid of any merit, the same is hereby dismissed. (DEEPAK GUPTA) 25.03.2025 JUDGE Pry Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No Page 3 of 3 Pages PRIYANKA 2025.03.26 17:58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document