HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 302 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J. (C.M. Application No.4 of 2025) 1. This is an application for deletion of appellant nos.4 and 5 from array of parties. 2. Heard. 3. Accordingly, the application for deletion of appellant nos.4 and 5 is allowed as they have wrongly been impleaded as appellants though they should be respondents. Appellants is permitted to implead them as proforma respondents in this appeal. (C.M. Application No.5 of 2025) 4. This is an application for amendment/ correction in the affidavit filed in support of the application for condonation of delay in filing this special appeal. 5. Heard. 6. This application has been filed as the date '17.08.2024' has incorrectly been mentioned in para no.3 of the affidavit in support of the application seeking condonation of delay which in fact should have been '03.10.2024'. Sri G.C. Verma, learned counsel for the opposite parties has raised an objection that an affidavit cannot be corrected, at best, a supplementary Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : C.S.C. Counsel for Respondent(s) : Girish Chandra Verma State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Secondary Education Lko. And 4 Others .....Appellant(s) Eccha Singh And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) affidavit should be filed. 7. The objection is highly technical. The affidavit in support of the application for correction is treated as supplementary affidavit and the date mentioned in para no.3 of the affidavit in support of the application for condonation of delay i.e. '17.08.2024' shall be read and understood as '03.10.2024'. 8. The application is disposed of accordingly. (C.M. Application No.1 of 2025) 9. This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 10. Heard. 11. This is an appeal by the State challenging an interim order dated 14.08.2024 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ-A No.5396 of 2024 staying the operation of order dated 09.11.2023 till the next date of listing. The appeal has been filed on 14.07.2025 with a delay of more than 301 days as on 11.07.2025 when the appeal was presented before the reporting section. 12. We have gone through the affidavit in support of the application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. We do not find satisfactory explanation for the delay. Para 2 refers to passing of judgment on 14.08.2024. Para 3 speaks of a detailed counter affidavit along with stay vacation application having been filed on 03.10.2024. Para 4 of the affidavit refers to filing of Contempt Petition No.59/2025 which as informed was filed in January, 2025 and notices therein were issued on 09.01.2025. Para 5 speaks of an application for deferment of contempt proceedings having been preferred which was not allowed, therefore, S.L.P. (Civil) No.20975 of 2025 was filed wherein vide order dated 23.04.2025, the same was withdrawn with liberty to give explanation to the High Court obviously in the contempt proceedings. Para 6 speaks of another deferment application having been filed before the contempt proceedings which has been rejected and the said rejection has not been challenged. Para 7 of the affidavit speaks of legal opinion having been SPLAD No. 302 of 2025 2 obtained from Chief Standing Counsel of this Court at Lucknow on 05.05.2025 i.e. a good nine months after passing of the time bound interim order. It further speaks of a Government Order dated 10.06.2025 having been issued for filing the special appeal in pursuance to which the D.I.O.S. requested the Chief Standing Counsel on 19.06.2025 for filing this appeal which actually has been filed on 14.07.2025. This is hardly an explanation for the delay of more than 301 days. On being confronted, learned counsel for the appellants says that stay vacation application has not been taken up by the writ court. If it is so then we can certainly request the writ court to take up the stay vacation application but we see no reason to condone the delay in filing this appeal that too against a time bound interim order. If the appellants were actually aggrieved by the time bound interim order which is impugned though it is highly debatable as to how far against such an order an appeal would be maintainable under Chapter-VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952, they should have challenged the same promptly. We do not find the delay to have been explained satisfactorily. 13. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the special appeal also stands rejected. However, we make it clear that this will have no adverse bearing on the writ proceedings which are pending rather we direct the registry to list the stay vacation application filed by the State on 28.10.2025 and request the learned Single Judge to kindly take up the stay vacation application of the State, consider and pass such orders as he deems proper, as per law. The registry shall place our order on records of Writ-A No.5396 of 2024. October 8, 2025 Shanu/- SPLAD No. 302 of 2025 3 (Rajeev Bharti,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHANU SUMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench