Sr. No.15 Regular List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(1196/2024) IN LPA 56/2024 U.T OF J&K AND ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) Through: - Mr. Abdul Rashid Malik, Sr. AAG with Mr. Mohd Younis Hafiz, Assisting Counsel Vs. MOHAMMAD SHAFI RATHER AND ORS. …RESPONDENT(S) Through:- None CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDER 21.05.2025 1. An appeal filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and four others against the judgment dated 4th September, 2015, passed by the learned Single Judge [“the writ Court”] in SWP No. 385/2001, is delayed by 8 years, 10 months and 1 day. Hence, this application for condonation of delay. 2. In the application for condonation of delay, the respondents have sought to explain the inordinate delay of more than eight years by stating that it took the appellants some time to obtain a certified copy of the impugned judgment dated 4th September, 2015. There is some period sought to be explained due to unrest in the valley in the 2nd half of the year 2016-2017. However, there is no explanation, whatsoever, offered with MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.05.25 regard to the year 2018. It is further submitted that there was a lockdown in the valley in the year 2019, which allegedly prevented the appellants to file the appeal in time. 3. The period from January 2020 up to ending March 2022, is sought to be excluded on the ground that the same was exempted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in view of the COVID- 19 restrictions imposed throughout the country. The appellants have also referred to the communications exchanged between the Administrative Department and the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs for obtaining sanction for filing the appeal. 4. We have gone through the application filed by the appellants seeking condonation of a huge delay of more than eight years. Though there have been some interruptions in the smooth working of the offices in the valley, yet it cannot be accepted that for eight years either the Secretariat did not function or that there was nobody in the concerned Department to take a decision with regard to the filing of the appeal. It needs to be placed on record that during the period there was some unrest or turmoil in the valley, this Court continued to function and thousands of petitions, appeals and other applications have been filed. 5. The story projected in the application is nothing but ipse dixit of the appellants. They have miserably failed to explain the MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.05.25 delay of more than eight years for filing the appeal. That apart, we have also gone through the impugned judgment and prima facie it does not suffer from any legal infirmity. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, we find no merit in this application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. Consequently, the appeal filed is also dismissed. (SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE Srinagar, 21.05.2025 “Mir Arif” Whether the Order is reportable? Yes/No. MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.05.25