^,^ ^A^1' HIGH COUHT OF OUHATI ISGAHH, BtlLASFIJlK Wrlt Petition (22TS No. 7118/2008 PBTITIOWER Rl&SPOlSi'DBWTB Kaiiker Roadways, Ihrouph the Monagiag Partner, Preetein Singh Garcha S/o. late Jogendra SiD.g, aged aboiit 59 years, R/o,- CivH Luies, Raipur (C. G.) ¥ersus 1 State 'Iraiisport Appellate Tr^l^in^l P^i^iii^ <pn\ JL X ^.|L<1 Go.^.ji-t-tJl.^ A \ I-^JLJ^ !L^JL ^:.^^;l^i,y 2 State 1 raasport Authonty, Kaipiir (CG) 3 Kamalieet Kaur, W/o. Late Sat'.vant Smg Gitl, aged about /1Q yeai's, r/o,- Pandn Bus Siaad Raipur (CG) (Appellaiit betbre 8. t .A. 1, Kaipiir) WRIT PBTITION UN'DISR ARTICLB 227 OF THB COHSTITUTION QF INDIA Appearai&ee: Shri F.S.Khare, Counsel tor the Petitioner. Shri Prasuun Bhaduri, Panel la\v57er for the State/respondeuts No. 1 & 2. ORAL ORDKR (19.12.2008) Ihey are heard on adniission. By way of tliis writ petition tiied under Article 227 of Uie Constitution ot India, ftie petitioner has chaUenged tlie validity of ttie onler dated 17.11.2008 (Anriexure P/1) passed by respondent No.l ui Appeal no. 65/2008, whereby tiie respondent No. 1 has coiidoned fhe delay of one month and 18 days ia filiag tlie appeal by allowiag Uie application tiled under Section 5 of tlie Limitation Act. ,::y ^ .<• -%! ^ A/ ^^ ^•^5S^^ W.P._(2!2?':(,]Blp._71,18,OF.^008 Leamed counsel ibr ihe petitioner subinits that the respondent No. 1 ought to have dismissed tbe appMcation aiid consequenfly the appeal ought to have been dismissed. 1 have considered tfie argumens advaaced by counsel tor tiie petitioner aiid also perused flie contents of Uie order dated 17.11.2008. The order dated 17,11.2008 has been passed atter due application of iniad, llie respondent No.1 has cousidered tlie grouiids raised by the respondent No.3 aiid ttien it has condoned tlie delay in filing tlie appeal and has fbced the appeal ±brlinal hearmg on 10. 12.2008. I do not thid aay reason to iiitertere ui me order passed by respondent No.l while condoning the delay in ilittig ttie appeal by respondent No.3. The petition deserves to be aiid is accorduigly dismissed at ttie motion stage itseit. No costs, Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge