IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.273 of 2010 1. Mostt.Janki Kuer @ Janki Devi, wife of Late Lal Sahab Tiwary 2. Narendra Tiwary 3. Dharmendra Tiwary @ Shailendra Tiwary Both sons of Late Lal Saheb Tiwary 4. Gita Devi 5. Meera Devi Both daughters of Late Saheb Tiwary 6. Ramdeo Tiwary, son of Late Tej Narain Tiwary, All residents of Village: Chhotaki Nainijore, P.S.Nainijore, District-Buxar. … Petitioners-appellants. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Commissioner, Patna Division, Patna. 3. Charge Officer, Bhojpur, Rohtas at Arrah. 4. Assistant Settlement Officer, Brahmpur Anchal, District- Buxar. 5. Madan Yadav, son of Deo Chand Yadav 6. Rama Shankar Yadav, son of Bibha Yadav 7. Gulab Yadav 8. Hari Gobind Yadav 9. Hareram Yadav All Sl.No.7 to 9 are sons of Late Sattan Yadav, residents of Village: Kadan Ahir Ke Dera, P.S. Shahpur, District- Bhojpur. 10. Godhani Devi, daughter of Late Sattan Yadav, and wife of Sheo Shankar Yadav, 11. Sonia Devi, daughter of Late Sattan Yadav, wife of Lalan Yadav, Both are residents of Village & P.O. Lachhu Tola, via Balbania, District: Bhojpur, 12. Chhotak Yadav, son of Jeut Yadav, resident of village-Kadam Ahirke Den, P.S.-Shahpur, District-Bhojpur. …. Respondents-Respondents. ----------- For the appellants : Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, Advocate. ----- - 2 - 02. 11.02.2010 I.A.No.1381 of 2010 This is an application for condonation of delay of two years three days in preferring the appeal. We have heard Mr. Ganpati Trivedi, learned counsel for the appellants-petitioners. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and upon perusal of the order passed by the learned Single Judge it is noticeable the writ petition bearing CWJC No.4719 of 1997 stood dismissed due to non-compliance of the peremptory order passed on 04.10.2004. MJC No.592 of 2007 was filed for recall of the order. The learned Single Judge by the impugned order did not recall the same by expressing the view on following terms:- “It is stated in the present application that the original petitioner no.1 of the writ petition had died on 22.6.2004, as a result of which the requisites steps could not be taken in time. It is further stated that steps have ultimately been taken on 19.03.2007. It is relevant to state that there were other petitioners on record who could have easily taken steps. It appears to me to be a case of gross laches and negligence, and I am of the view that no case for modification of the said order is made out. This application is accordingly rejected.” Thereafter the present appeal has been filed along with the application for condonation of delay. In our considered opinion the order passed by the learned Single Judge withstands close scrutiny and, that apart, grounds urged - 3 - in the application for condonation of delay do not justify condonation of such enormous delay and, accordingly, the application for condonation of delay stands dismissed and as a necessary corollary the appeal also stands dismissed in limine. Sunil (Dipak Misra, C.J.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)