http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: DR. ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       11/01/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCC  (2)  82        JT 1996 (1)   562  1996 SCALE  (1)446

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Though the  respondents have  been served,  no  one  is appearing either in person or through counsel.      Leave granted.      The learned  single Judge  allowed the Writ Petition on the ground  that the  lecturers were  appointed  on  regular basis and  satisfied the  qualifications prescribed in J & K Medical Education  (Gazetted)  Services  Recruitment  Rules, 1979 and were appointed to time bound promotion by virtue of Government order  No. 517-HME  of 1987 dated 19.10.1987. The said order  indicates that  excluding the  time during which they had  worked against  ad hoc  appointment, if  they  had completed 7  years as  on March  31,  1987,  they  would  be designated on  time bound  promotional scheme  as  Assistant Professors in  the scale of Rs. 2350-4050/- w.e.f. 1.4.1987. The respondents  had not  completed 7 years’ regular service as on  that date.  Yet learned  single Judge  had given  the benefit of  the above  G.O. There  was a  delay of  about  3 months in  filing the  appeal to  the  Division  Bench.  The Division Bench of the High Court was not inclined to condone the delay on the ground that proper explanation had not been given. We  have considered  the  reasoning  of  the  learned Judges. On  the facts  and circumstances,  we think that the explanation given  for the  delay in  filing the  appeal  is proper. It is notorious and court would take judicial notice that no  one would  take responsibility for the delay and in the process  of leisurely  consultations  between  different departments or  at different  levels in  the same department the limitation  to file  the appeal  gets barred. Refusal to condone the  delay feeds  public injustice and a premium for lethargy and  encourages mischief.  Applying  the  pragmatic approach,  the   explanation  for  the  delay  needs  to  be considered  and   the  cause   of   justice   advanced   and consideration angulated  and  accordingly,  considered  from that perspective  the delay  gets condoned.  The  matter  is

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

remitted to  the High  Court for  fresh disposal  on  merits according to law.      The appeal is allowed. No costs.