HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 140 of 2010 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. (Order on C.M.Application No.24958 of 2010; Application for Condonation of Delay) 1. Heard. 2. This appeal is delayed by 09 months 16 days. The impugned judgment was passed on 24.04.2009 and the Intra-Court appeal has been filed belatedly on 11.03.2010. The judgment has been complied in the interregnum i.e. on 20.07.2010 and the respondent has undergone six months B.T.C. training course. Of course it is subject to the result of the appeal. The appeal as stated is belated. 3. We have gone through the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay. Paragraph No.2 of the affidavit accepts the receipt of the impugned judgment in the office of the concerned appellants alongwith letter dated 21.05.2009. The State is represented by Standing Counsel, therefore, intimation about the said judgment which was passed in open Court must have been sent to the concerned authorities prior to 21.05.2009, nevertheless, even if 21.05.2009 is taken as the date of receipt of the said judgment by the appellants, the next date mentioned in the affidavit is 21.07.2009 when the Secretary, Examination Regulatory Authority, Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad sought necessary information, thereafter, the affidavit goes on to state the correspondence Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Standing Counsel, Sandeep Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : S.P. Shukla, Ashish Kumar Pandey, Sharad Pathak State Of U.P. Thru Secretary Basic Education .....Appellant(s) Ms. Archana D/O Laxmi Narayan Mishra .....Respondent(s) which took place in August and September, 2009. Apart from it no other explanation has been offered. The delay is not only is inordinate, it has not been satisfactorily explained. The explanations given are nothing but a ruse and sham. They are more in the nature of excuses. The explanations lack bonafide. 4. For all these reasons, we are not inclined to condone the delay and extend the limitation in filing this appeal. The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is accordingly rejected consequently, the appeal is also dismissed. October 28, 2025 -Piyush- SPLAD No. 140 of 2010 2 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench