HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 224 of 2023 Chief Justice's Court HON'BLE ARUN BHANSALI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 27.04.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ-A No.718 of 2014, whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent has been allowed and the impugned order dated 31.12.2012 has been quashed along with certain directions for payment of 50% of the emoluments and continuity in service for the purpose of reckoning his post retiral benefits. 2. The appeal is barred by 330 days. 3. An application (C.M. Application No.1 of 2023), seeking condonation of delay has been filed along with an affidavit. 4. A bare look at the affidavit reveals that only two facts have been indicated that the order was passed on 27.04.2022 and after getting the knowledge of the order, the office of the appellants decided to file the appeal and that delay occurred in filing the appeal due to taking permission in respect of filing of the appeal and that the delay occurred beyond control of appellants because permission was received in the month of October, 2022 and the original papers were misplaced from the Court room and the appeal has been filed on 21.04.2023. 5. The cursory nature of affidavit which has been filed seeking condonation of 330 days of delay, is evidence enough of the fact that the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Nishant Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ram Singh U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. Lko. Thru. Managing Director and Others .....Appellant(s) Virendra Pratap Singh .....Respondent(s) appellants have been negligent to the core in pursuing the remedy, if they had any grievance qua the judgement impugned. 6. Counsel for the respondent indicates that the order impugned has already been implemented and the respondent has received the benefits under the order impugned, which aspect is not disputed by the counsel for the appellants. 7. In the overall facts situation of the case, we do not find any reason to condone the delay of 330 days in filing the appeal. 8. There is no substance in the application seeking condonation of delay, the same is, therefore, dismissed. 9. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed as barred by limitation. December 16, 2025 RK/Harshita SPLAD No. 224 of 2023 2 (Jaspreet Singh,J.) (Arun Bhansali,CJ.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench