Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010177782025 2026:GAU-AS:1965-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3412/2025 HRITURAJ GOGOI S/O SRI TANKESWAR GOGOI, R/O HOUSE NO. 19, CHANDAN NAGAR PATH, LANE 3, BASISTHA, GUWAHATI, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN 781028 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006 2:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONAL (A) DEPTT. ASSAM SECRETARIAT (CIVIL) DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 3:THE SECY. IN THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (A) DEPTT. ASSAM SECRETARIAT (CIVIL) DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 4:THE JOINT SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (A) DEPTT. ASSAM SECRETARIAT (CIVIL) DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 5:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 REVENUE DEPTT. ASSAM SECRETARIAT (CIVIL) DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER LAKHIMPUR DIST. NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSAM PIN 78700 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U DUTTA, MR. B. KUMAR,B DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC. REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 11-02-2026 (A.D. Choudhury, J.) 1. This Interlocutory Application is filed seeking condonation of the delay of 1162 days in preferring the connected appeal against the common judgment dated 18.03.2020, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 3121/2019. 2. We have heard Mr. U. Dutta, learned Advocate for the applicant/appellant and Mr. N. Kohli, learned Senior Advocate, along with Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, Assam, for the respondents. 3. A coordinate Bench has already dealt with the said common judgment in WA No.59/2023 being assailed by the writ Page No.# 3/4 petitioners, similarly situated to that of the present applicant and other connected writ appeals, interfering with the common judgment and order of the learned Single Judge. 4. Perused the averments made in the application. 5. The primary ground for seeking condonation of delay in preferring the Writ Appeal is that immediately after delivery of the judgment, the father of the petitioner fell ill and thereafter, due to covid pandemic, there was a total lockdown. Even after covid pandemic was over, due to the pressing need to look after the old, ailing father, the applicant could not approach this court promptly. 6. The length of the delay is indeed a relevant factor to be considered while deciding an application for condonation of delay. However, when sufficient cause is shown, the discretion vested in the Courts to condone delay is to be exercised, though sufficient cause shall not mean a mere explanation given superficially. 7. In the case at hand, we have found that the applicant has sufficiently explained the reasons for the delay and has substantiated that, due to his father's health condition, he was prevented from approaching the Court promptly and within the prescribed period of limitation. 8. We do not see any negligence, lack of bona-fide or inaction on the part of the applicant. 9. Based on the materials available on record, it cannot be said that the applicant was not diligent or that the delay was intentional. 10. Thus, having considered the explanation tendered by Page No.# 4/4 the applicant, this Court is satisfied that the delay occasioned in preferring the connected Writ Appeal was neither deliberate nor actuated by negligence but resulted from bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the applicant/appellant. In the absence of gross latches or mala fide intention attributable to the applicant, this Court would lean in favour of the adjudication on merits. 11. In the given facts of the present case, the explanation furnished inspires confidence, and no prejudice is demonstrated to have been caused to the respondents by such delay inasmuch as the impugned judgment has already been interfered with by a co- ordinate bench. 12. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and having satisfied that the causes shown are sufficient to condone the delay of 1162 days, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay. Ordered accordingly. 13. The Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. 14. The Registry to process the appeal and list the same on 20.03.2026 under the appropriate heading. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant