Civil Revision No. 5707 of 2008 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 5707 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision : 18.5.2009 Rakesh Kumar ..... Petitioner vs The Union of India and others ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. R. S. Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ram Chander, Advocate, for the respondents. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 28.5.2008, passed by learned court below, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 15 days in filing the appeal against the judgment and decree of the trial court was dismissed. Briefly, the facts are that father of the petitioner Baldev Singh, Ex. No. 6403518 Chowkidar 69 Coy ASC (Sup) Type G c/o 56 APO, was declared unfit for Military employment on 28.2.2000. Considering this fact that the petitioner being his son was entitled to compassionate appointment, he filed suit for declaration and mandatory injunction against the respondents. The suit was dismissed on 8.8.2005. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment and decree of the trial court was belated by 15 days. The application for condonation of delay was filed which was dismissed. It is this order which is impugned in the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in terms of the policy of the respondents, the petitioner was entitled to compassionate appointment on account of the fact that his father was discharged on medical disability. He got late in filing the appeal as he was suffering from typhoid. The plea set up by the petitioner was not considered by the learned court below. The delay was not substantial. The learned court below should have taken compassionate view in dealing with the prayer of the petitioner and instead of dismissing the application for condonation of delay, the appeal should have been heard and disposed of on merits. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that it is a case where the petitioner had not been able to substantiate the plea raised by Civil Revision No. 5707 of 2008 -2- him seeking condonation of delay. No evidence was led to show that the petitioner was suffering from typhoid. In the absence thereof, no illegality was committed by the learned court below in dismissing the application for condonation of delay. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. Admittedly, there was delay of 15 days in filing the appeal before the learned court below. Though the petitioner claimed that he was suffering from typhoid, however, medical prescription of the doctor was not produced. To that extent, there is lapse on the part of the petitioner. However, still considering the fact that delay was not substantial and further the petitioner was not going to gain anything by filing appeal belatedly and that too merely with a delay of 15 days, taking a lenient view in the matter, the delay in filing of appeal before the learned Lower Appellate court deserves to be condoned and the petitioner should be given a chance to address arguments on merits where he is seeking compassionate appointment for discharge of his father on account of medical disability. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Parties through their counsels are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Gurdaspur, on 30.5.2009 for further proceedings, who may either keep the appeal with him or may entrust the same to any other Additional District Judge for disposal on merits. Copy of this order be given dasti on payment of usual fee. 18.5.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge