- (1.) THIS application is by the appellant, the State of Jharkhand for condoning the delay of 22 days in filing the appeal against a judgment in W.P. (S) No. 6084 of 2002. The petition is opposed by the respondent, the writ petitioner.
(2.) IT is submitted in the petition that the delay occurred in view of the fact that the question whether to file the appeal or not had to be considered in the light of the implications of the judgment under appeal. Opinion of the Advocate General was sought and obtained and thereafter the appeal was filed. This was the reason for the delay. There was no absence of bona fides on the part of the State.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the first respondent is right in submitting that by applying the strict test, no sufficient cause has been made out for condoning the delay, since the State should have taken the steps in time. But while appreciating this argument, we have to take note of the fact that from the same judgment, an appeal, LPA No. 336 of 2003 filed in time by the Siddhu Kanhu University is pending and this Court has to consider the correctness of the decision rendered by the learned single Judge in that appeal. Since the consideration of the merits of the Judgment is inevitable, we are satisfied that a more liberal approach can be made to the application filed by the State for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. Making that liberal approach, we are satisfied that there is no absence of bona fide on the part of the State in not filing the appeal in time. We are satisfied that sufficient cause has been made out by the State for condoning the delay, though we must observe that with due diligence, the appeal could have been filed earlier. Thus, finding that sufficient cause has been made out, we condone the delay in filing the appeal, and allow this application, I.A. No. 5237 of 2003.;