Page No.# 1/3 GAHC020007392025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH I.A.(Civil)/65/2026 SHRI S. ABENITO AWOMI S/O MR. SHRTOVI AWOMI R/O HOUSE NO. 658 MOUNT VIEW COLONY PURANA BAZAR DIMAPUR NAGALAND VERSUS STATE OF NAGALAND AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF NAGALAND NAGALAND KOHIMA 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVT. OF NAGALAND DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION KOHIMA NAGALAND 3:THE PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION KOHIMA NAGALAND 4:THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF SCHOOL EDUCATION NAGALAND KOHIMA 5:THE SR. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER Page No.# 2/3 DIMAPUR NAGALAND 6:THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER DIMAPUR NAGALAND 7:THE REGISTRAR NAGALAND UNIVERSITY HEADQUARTERS LUMAMI CAMPUS ZUNHEBOTO NAGALAND - 798627 8:THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION NAGALAND UNIVERSITY HEADQUARTERS LUMAMI CAMPUS ZUNHEBOTO NAGALAND 798627 ------------ Advocate for : LELIMTHONG P YIMCHUNGER Advocate for : GOVT ADV NL appearing for STATE OF NAGALAND AND 7 ORS BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 10.06.2026 [Manish Choudhury, J] Heard Mr. A. Zhimomi, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Mr. N. Angami, learned Government Advocate, Nagaland for the opposite party nos. 1 to 6-respondents. The instant application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is preferred seeking condonation of delay of 164 days, which delay has occurred in filing the accompanying writ appeal against a common Judgment and Order dated 09.09.2025, rendered in a batch of writ petitions, including W.P.[C] no. 251/2022 wherein the applicant-appellant here was the writ petitioner. Mr. Zhimomi, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant has submitted that a number of writ appeals have already been preferred against the common Page No.# 3/3 Judgment and Order dated 09.09.2025 by similarly situated writ petitioners and in those writ appeals, notices have already been issued to the respondents. As the applicant-appellant is similarly situated like the appellants in the writ appeals, W.A. 30/2025, W.A. 33/2025, W.A. 34/2025, W.A. 35/2025, W.A. 36/2025, W.A. 37/2025 & W.A. 38/2025, the period of delay which has occurred in filing the accompany writ appeal is to be condoned. He has submitted that for reasons explained in the application, the applicant was prevented from the preferring the writ appeal due to sufficient cause. Mr. Angami, learned Government Advocate appearing for the opposite parties-respondents has agreed to the submissions regarding the appeals preferred by the similarly situated persons. Having gone through the explanation provided in the instant application, more particularly, paragraphs 11 to 13, we are of the considered view that the applicant-appellant has been able to show sufficient cause as regards the delay which has occurred in filing the accompanying writ appeal. Therefore, the instant applicant stands allowed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant