- (1.) THIS Special Appeal has been filed with the delay of 351 days, against the order of learned Single Judge dated 18.12.2013, by which, with the consent of the parties, the writ petition was disposed of, in the light of the judgment in Gopal Singh v. State and Ors., 2010 (4) WLC (Raj.) 190. The short order passed by learned Single Judge is quoted below: - - "Learned counsel for both the parties agree for disposal of the writ petition in the light of the judgment in the case of Gopal Singh v. State and Ors. reported in, 2010(4) WLC (Raj.) 190. In view of above, this writ petition disposed of and is ordered to be governed by the judgment in the case of Gopal Singh (supra). The direction given in the case of Gopal Singh (supra) would apply to the present writ petition also. The action pursuant to the direction, given above, be taken by the respondent/s within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. This disposes of the stay application as well."
(2.) THE delay is sought to be explained in the affidavit of Satish Kumar, Circle Officer, Neem Ka Thana Police Station, District Sikar, on the ground that the matter was sent to the Head Office alongwith the legal opinion of the counsel for the department. The matter was examined at the Head Office level, and was further sent to the Administrative Department for taking a final decision in the matter, for filing the Special Appeal. The matter was examined and the decision was taken for filing the Special Appeal, against the order passed by learned Single Judge dated 18.12.2013, and thereafter the officer incharge was appointed, and approached the counsel for the department, who drafted the Special Appeal without any delay.
(3.) THE grounds for condonation of delay are entirely vague, as the necessary particulars with regard to the date when the matter was sent to the Administrative Department, and was thereafter re -sent to the Administrative Department, and the date, on which the administrative approval was given, has not been provided. We also find substance in the objection raised by learned counsel appearing for the caveator -respondent, that the order under challenge is a consent order, to dispose of the writ petition, in the light of the judgment in Gopal Singh's case (supra), and thus, the Special Appeal is not maintainable.;