2026:JHHC:17232-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI L.P.A. No. 615 of 2025 1. M/s Central Coal Field Limited, Ranchi, through its authorized signatory, Jobi VP, S/o Late V V Philip 2. The Director Personnel (Head Quarter), Central Coal Field Limited, Ranchi 3. The General Manager (H.R.D.), Central Coal Field Limited, Ranchi 4. The General manager (P & IR), Central Coal Field Limited, Ranchi 5. The General Manager Dhori Area, Central Coal Field Limited, Bokaro 6. The Project Officer, C.C.L. Tarmi O.C.P., P.O. & P.S.-Tarmi, District- Bokaro 7. The Finance Manager, Termi O.C.P., Central Coal Field Limited, Tarmi, Bokaro 8. The Staff Officer (P & A), C.C.L., Dhori Area, P.O. & P.S.-Dhori, Bokaro ….. Appellants Versus Basanti Bai, W/o Late Mangtu Ram, R/o Central Colony Makoli, P.O.-Makoli, P.S.-Chandrapura, District-Bokaro ….. Respondent ----- CORAM HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Appellants: Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Mr. Ankit Vishal, Advocate For the Respondent: - ----- 02/15.06.2026 I.A. No. 13025 of 2025: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present interlocutory application seeks condonation of delay of 686 days in filing this L.P.A. against the order dated 05.09.2023 disposing of W.P.(S) No. 774 of 2023. 3. The record shows that against this very order, the applicant had preferred an L.P.A., but the same was withdrawn with liberty to file a review petition vide order passed on 03.09.2024 (Annexure-3). Thereafter the review petition was filed and the same was dismissed on 02.05.2025. Again, after delay, this L.P.A. has been filed with a consolidated delay of 686 days. 2026:JHHC:17232-DB 2 4. This is a case where some benefits have been paid to a widow on account of the death of her husband. Learned counsel for the appellant admits that the benefits have already been given and this fact was recorded in the order disposing of Cont. Case (Civil) No. 64 of 2024. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant has also produced on record the judgment and order dated 10.10.2025 disposing of L.P.A. No. 42 of 2025 in some different matter concerning this very appellant wherein the point of law has already been settled. The applicant, for a considerable period of time, denied the respondent-widow certain benefits on account of the death of her husband while in service. The widow had to file a writ petition, then faced the L.P.A., which was withdrawn with liberty to file a review petition, faced a review petition and was ultimately forced to file a contempt petition. 6. In the above circumstances, we do not think that the applicant was bonafidely pursuing this matter. This is more so because according to the applicant, the law stands settled in their favour vide the judgment and order dated 10.10.2025 passed in L.P.A. No. 42 of 2025. 7. Apart from the fact that the delay is inordinate, even if some allowance is to be made for the various proceedings, we do not think that such equitable relief of condoning the delay of 686 days should be granted in the peculiar facts of this case. Any such indulgence will only prolong the misery of the respondent-widow. We also note that in the liberty obtained by the applicant, there was no reference to any liberty for filing of an L.P.A., should the review petition be dismissed. Assuming for the sake of argument that no such liberty was required, still, proper explanation for 2026:JHHC:17232-DB 3 condonation of delay was necessary, which according to us, is absent. 8. Therefore, on cumulative consideration of all the above factors, we dismiss this interlocutory application. L.P.A. No. 615 of 2025: 9. Consequently, the accompanying appeal and the other interlocutory application (if any) do not survive and are disposed of. (M. S. SONAK, C.J.) (RAJESH SHANKAR, J.) 15.06.2026 Satish/Vikas/