State of H.P and others vs. Jagdish Chand Sharma alongwith connected matter CMP(M) No.88 of 2025 and CMP(M) No.406 of 2025 Item No.D-5 13.08.2025 Present: Mr. Rakesh Dhaulta, Additional Advocate General for the applicants/appellants, in both the appeals. Mr. Parv Sharma and Mr.Shekhar Badola, Advocates, for the respondent, in both the appeals. CMP(M) Nos.88 and 406 of 2025 Application being CMP(M) No. 88 of 2025 is filed for condonation of delay of 217 days’ in filing the appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 19.03.2024 in CWPOA No.3447 of 2019. 2. Application being CMP(M) No.406 of 2025 has been filed for condoning the delay of 169 days’ in filing the appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 14th May, 2024 passed in CWPOA No. 6351 of 2019. 3. In the reply filed to CMP(M) No. 88 of 2025, the plea taken is that the respondent had not bothered to implement the judgment and only when the execution petition was filed as such, the notice was issued on 15.10.2024. The writ petitioner has also retired and therefore objection is there as such regarding the filing of the appeal at a belated stage, by the State. 4. A perusal of the applications would go on to show that sufficient cause is sought to be made out on account of the fact that the case was decided on 19.03.2024 and 14.05.2024 and after receipt of copy of judgment records of this case remained connected to various matters 50 years back. After collecting the record as such, the matter was sent to the Government and taken up on 02.09.2024 and approval had been granted to file the appeal in the matter, which was received on 10.09.2024 and in legal cell, it was received on 18.09.2024. Resultantly, the LPAs have been prepared on 16.10.2024 and 26.11.2024, respectively and sent for vetting on 21.10.2024 and 03.12.2024, respectively and thereafter filed on 30.11.2024 and 16.12.2024, respectively and therefore, the delay has occurred in filing the appeal. 5. Keeping in view the sequence of events as such projected by the State, we are of the considered opinion that sufficient cause has been made out as such to condone the delay in view of the law laid down in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. Smt. Katiji and others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in State of Nagaland vs. Lipok Ao & Ors., (2005) 3 SCC 752 that each and every day’s delay is not to be explained and if there is no gross negligence or deliberate inaction, the Court would be liberal as such in condoning the delay. 6. Accordingly, the delay is condoned. The applications stand disposed of accordingly. 7. Appeals be registered and listed for consideration on 25.09.2025. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice s 13th August, 2025 ( Ranjan Sharma ) (priti) Judge