IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12292 of 2011 1. Kalawati Kumari W/O Sri Upendra Thakur Resident of Village-Kurtha, P.S.-Kurtha, District-Arwal-----Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner Magadh Division, Gaya. 3. The District Magistrate, Arwal 4. The District Welfare Officer-Cum-District, Programme Officer, Arwal. 5. The Children Development Project Officer, Kurtha, District, Arwal---------------------------------Respondents ---------------------------------- 2 23.9.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. There is no dispute with regard to the provision of law. The time fixed for filing appeal against the order is 30 days. The order passed by the District Magistrate in the case of present petitioner was on 29.11.2009. Appeal came to be filed on 4.2.2011, i.e. after more than a year. Annexure-10 is the order of Divisional Commissioner by virtue of which appeal has been dismissed on the ground of being barred by limitation. Reason given by the petitioner in the supplementary affidavit is that she was awaiting the result of yet another appeal filed by Anganbari Sewika in relation to same transaction and it is only after such a decision that she was advised to file the appeal. The Court fails to understand the co-relation between the assertion of right of the petitioner vis-à-vis the case filed by Anganbari Sewika. The petitioner should have at least been careful to file her appeal on time and may have tried to get it heard after the decision in the appeal of Anganbari Sewika. But filing the appeal for such a long delay would entitle Divisional Commissioner to dismiss 2 the appeal on the ground of limitation. The reason offered or given by the petitioner is not a valid and cogent reason and in the above circumstances condonation of such delay is unwarranted. Since there is no infirmity with the order of the Divisional Commissioner therefore no interference is called for. This writ petition is dismissed. RPS ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)