Meghalaya High Court
MC(WA)/24/2023 of THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS. Vs No. G/0110677N HAVILDAR/GD GOPAL DEV BHATT AND ANR. on 30 January 2024
No. 02 Regular List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG MC(WA) No. 24 of 2023 Date of Order: 30.01.2024 Union of India & 2 Ors. Vs. No. G/0110677N Havildar/GD Gopal Dev Bhatt & Anr. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Serial No. 02 Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYAAT SHILLONG
MC(WA) No. 24 of 2023
Date of Order: 30.01.2024Union of India & 2 Ors. Vs. No. G/0110677N Havildar/GD Gopal Dev Bhatt & Anr.
Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Dr. N. Mozika, DSGI. with Ms. A. Pradhan, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. V. Kumar, Adv. i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: Yes/No ORAL:
Heard Dr. N. Mozika, learned DSGI, who has submitted that an appeal was preferred by the applicants herein against the judgment and order dated 20.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No. 180 of 2022. However, in the course of preferring the appeal, a delay of about 90 days has been caused, the reason being that specific instructions as well as inter-departmental procedures and proceedings could not be completed in time to enable the appeal to be filed before this Court. On this ground, therefore, the prayer for condonation of delay in filing the related appeal.
Mr. V. Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has submitted that though the respondent has filed an objection to the application for condonation of delay, however, at the hearing, has candidly submitted that no strong objection is made, if the delay is condoned.
This Court, having considered the submission made, is of the opinion that the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal of about 90 days is hereby condoned.
Application disposed of.
The appeal is hereby admitted on board.
Registry is directed to diarize the appeal and list it after 3(three)
weeks for hearing.
(B. Bhattacharjee) (W. Diengdoh)
Judge Judge
Meghalaya 30.01.2024 “D. Nary, PS”