Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010018882026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/220/2026 THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS. CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2: THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PERSONNNEL (A) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3: THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (A) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-78100 VERSUS PRABIR CHANDRA KAKATI AND 5 ORS S/O LATE SIBA CH KAKATI, R/O SAGARIKA PATH, P.O- ZOO ROAD, P.S- GITANAGAR, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN-781024 2:THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS NEW DELHI-110011 3:UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY UPSC DHOLPUR HOUSE NEW DELHI-110069 4:J.B. EKKA PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 5:TONMOY PRATIM BORGOHAIN IAS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 6:SMT. PANCHALI KAKATI ACS JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D NATH (SR. GA, ASSAM), Advocate for the Respondent : N K NEOG (FOR CAVEATOR), MR. H A LASKAR(R1),MR. S B LASKAR(R1),SC, UPSC,DY.S.G.I. – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 25-02-2026 (A.D. Choudhury, J.) 1. This Interlocutory Application is filed seeking condonation of the delay of 426 days in preferring the connected appeal against the judgment dated 25.06.2024, passed by a learned Single Judge of this court in WP(C) 367/2022. 2. We have heard Mr. D Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate for the applicants /appellants and Mr. A Page No.# 3/4 Todi, learned counsel for the respondents. 3. Perused the averments made in the application. 4. The primary ground for seeking condonation of delay in preferring the Writ Appeal is that immediately after delivery of the judgment, the Personnel (A) Department processed the file and after careful consideration the applicant department furnished their view that there are questions of law that needs to be addressed as the same will have a cascading effect on how the Government deals with the ACR’s of its officer. Accordingly, the applicants could not approach this court promptly. 5. 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. 6. In the case at hand, we have found that the applicants have sufficiently explained the reasons for the delay and has substantiated that, due to the reason beyond their control, they were prevented from approaching the Court promptly and within the prescribed period of limitation. 7. We do not see any negligence, lack of bona-fide or inaction on the part of the applicant. 8. Based on the materials available on record, it cannot be said that the applicants were not diligent or that the delay was intentional. 9. Thus, having considered the explanation tendered by the applicants, this Court is satisfied that the delay occasioned in Page No.# 4/4 preferring the connected Writ Appeal was neither deliberate nor actuated by negligence but resulted from bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the applicants/appellants. In the absence of gross latches or mala fide intention attributable to the applicants, this Court would lean in favour of the adjudication on merits. 10. 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. 11. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and having satisfied that the causes shown are sufficient to condone the delay of 426 days, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay. Ordered accordingly. 12. The Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. 13. The Registry to process the connected appeal and, if the same is found defect free, shall list the same under the appropriate heading, preferably on 27.04.2026. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant