Sangeet Lodha, J. - (1.) This intra court appeal is directed against order dated 5.5.18 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant seeking directions to the respondents to accord him appointment on the post of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) pursuant to advertisement dated 6.5.14 issued by the Dr.Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur ('the University'), has been dismissed. The appellant has also assailed legality of order dated 25.9.19 passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the review petition preferred seeking review of the said order dated 5.5.18.
(2.) The appeal is reported to be barred by limitation for 730 days. It is accompanied by an application under Section 5 of Limitation Act, seeking condonation of delay.
(3.) Precisely, the explanation furnished by the appellant for inordinate delay in filing the appeal set out in para 3 of the application reads as under: "3. That in the present case, it is clear that the Appellant has made their all efforts to prefer the present appeal in within the prescribed limitation before this Hon'ble Court but the present appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time and there is sufficient, bonafide and justified reasons for delay to prefer the above said appeal. The delay to prefer the present appeal was not intentionally and only due to lack of communication as well as sudden illness of the Appellant, thus, the delay to prefer the present appeal may be condoned due to bonafide reasons. Only on a technical ground of limitation, any party should not be deceived from justice. The procedural law is handmade justice and it cannot debar the parties to get the justice. Meaning thereby, the procedure could only substantive for justice and could not be obstructive. If the delay to prefer the present appeal would not be condoned then the present appeal could not be heard on merits and the appellant would be remain unheard. As against this, if the delay to prefer the present appeal would be condoned then Respondents would not be suffered by any prejudice caused. In these circumstances, in the present case, it is very necessary to condone the delay to prefer the present appeal of the appellant may be heard on merits to resolve the very important legal controversy between the parties.";