IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE SIDE SIDE SIDE LPA LPA LPA NO. 21 OF 2007 NO. 21 OF 2007 NO. 21 OF 2007 JAIPRAKASH JAIPRAKASH JAIPRAKASH KAILASHNATH UPADHYAY ... KAILASHNATH UPADHYAY ... KAILASHNATH UPADHYAY ... APPELLANT. APPELLANT. APPELLANT. VS. VS. VS. ADISHAKTI ADISHAKTI ADISHAKTI HINDI PRACHAR SAMITI HINDI PRACHAR SAMITI HINDI PRACHAR SAMITI THROUGH THROUGH THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND ORS. ... THE SECRETARY AND ORS. ... THE SECRETARY AND ORS. ... RESPONDENTS. RESPONDENTS. RESPONDENTS. M.S.LAGU M.S.LAGU M.S.LAGU H/F. N.R.BUBNA FOR THE APPELLANT. H/F. N.R.BUBNA FOR THE APPELLANT. H/F. N.R.BUBNA FOR THE APPELLANT. C.K.THOMAS C.K.THOMAS C.K.THOMAS FOR RESPONDENT NO. 1 & 2. FOR RESPONDENT NO. 1 & 2. FOR RESPONDENT NO. 1 & 2. MR. MR. MR. R.M.PATNE AGP FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.3. R.M.PATNE AGP FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.3. R.M.PATNE AGP FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.3. CORAM CORAM CORAM : J.N.PATEL & A. A. SAYED, JJ. : J.N.PATEL & A. A. SAYED, JJ. : J.N.PATEL & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATE DATE DATE : June 18, 2007. : June 18, 2007. : June 18, 2007. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1.1.1. Heard Heard Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. the learned Counsel for the parties. the learned Counsel for the parties. 2.2.2. Taking Taking Taking into consideration the case of the into consideration the case of the into consideration the case of the parties, parties, parties, we are of the view that the LPA can be we are of the view that the LPA can be we are of the view that the LPA can be disposed disposed disposed of at the stage of admission itself. of at the stage of admission itself. of at the stage of admission itself. Therefore, Therefore, Therefore, we have heard the parties at length. we have heard the parties at length. we have heard the parties at length. 3.3.3. The The The Appellant challenged the Order passed by Appellant challenged the Order passed by Appellant challenged the Order passed by the the the School Tribunal, dated 7.5.2005 dismissing his School Tribunal, dated 7.5.2005 dismissing his School Tribunal, dated 7.5.2005 dismissing his appeal appeal appeal on the ground that the same was beyond the on the ground that the same was beyond the on the ground that the same was beyond the period period period of limitation. of limitation. of limitation. 4.4.4. ItItIt was brought to our notice that the was brought to our notice that the was brought to our notice that the observation observation observation of of of the learned Single Judge i.e. an appeal the learned Single Judge i.e. an appeal the learned Single Judge i.e. an appeal was was was filed before the School Tribunal, challenging the filed before the School Tribunal, challenging the filed before the School Tribunal, challenging the Order Order Order dated 7.5.2005, was probably due to inadvertence dated 7.5.2005, was probably due to inadvertence dated 7.5.2005, was probably due to inadvertence for for for the reason that the Writ Petition was filed the reason that the Writ Petition was filed the reason that the Writ Petition was filed challenging challenging challenging the Judgment and Order dated 7.5.2005, the Judgment and Order dated 7.5.2005, the Judgment and Order dated 7.5.2005, passed passed passed by the learned President of Grievance Committed by the learned President of Grievance Committed by the learned President of Grievance Committed which which which entertained the complaint Under Section 7 of the entertained the complaint Under Section 7 of the entertained the complaint Under Section 7 of the Act. Act. Act. This fact situation is not disputed. This fact situation is not disputed. This fact situation is not disputed. 5.5.5. The The The only issue, which arises for consideration only issue, which arises for consideration only issue, which arises for consideration isisis "whether the impugned Order, passed by one member "whether the impugned Order, passed by one member "whether the impugned Order, passed by one member committee, committee, committee, dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay was was was appropriate". appropriate". appropriate". 6.6.6. The The The learned Single Judge has dismissed the learned Single Judge has dismissed the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition petition petition on the ground that the findings of the on the ground that the findings of the on the ground that the findings of the Grievance Grievance Grievance Committee as regards delay in preferring the Committee as regards delay in preferring the Committee as regards delay in preferring the Appeal Appeal Appeal does not call for any interference in the does not call for any interference in the does not call for any interference in the limited limited limited exercise of jurisdiction under Section 227 of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 227 of exercise of jurisdiction under Section 227 of the the the Constitution of India, as the discretion exercised Constitution of India, as the discretion exercised Constitution of India, as the discretion exercised by by by the said Committee rejecting the request for the said Committee rejecting the request for the said Committee rejecting the request for condonation condonation condonation of the delay in filing the Appeal cannot be of the delay in filing the Appeal cannot be of the delay in filing the Appeal cannot be said said said to be illegal, perverse or arbitrary. to be illegal, perverse or arbitrary. to be illegal, perverse or arbitrary. 7.7.7. In In In our view, taking into consideration the our view, taking into consideration the our view, taking into consideration the peculiar peculiar peculiar facts and circumstances, which have been facts and circumstances, which have been facts and circumstances, which have been narrated narrated narrated by the appellant, in submitting that the by the appellant, in submitting that the by the appellant, in submitting that the Grievance Grievance Grievance Committee could have considered the case of Committee could have considered the case of Committee could have considered the case of the the the appellant appellant appellant for condonation of the delay but as there for condonation of the delay but as there for condonation of the delay but as there was was was no application filed for the said purpose, the no application filed for the said purpose, the no application filed for the said purpose, the Grievance Grievance Grievance Committee was justified in rejecting the Committee was justified in rejecting the Committee was justified in rejecting the appeal, appeal, appeal, which was preferred beyond the period of which was preferred beyond the period of which was preferred beyond the period of limitation. limitation. limitation. 8.8.8. ItItIt is submitted by the learned Counsel for the is submitted by the learned Counsel for the is submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellant appellant appellant that there is no time period prescribed for that there is no time period prescribed for that there is no time period prescribed for preferring preferring preferring an an an Appeal before the Grievance Committee and Appeal before the Grievance Committee and Appeal before the Grievance Committee and on on on this count also, the Order of the Grievance this count also, the Order of the Grievance this count also, the Order of the Grievance Committee Committee Committee cannot be sustained. cannot be sustained. cannot be sustained. 9.9.9. ItItIt is pointed out to us by the learned Counsel is pointed out to us by the learned Counsel is pointed out to us by the learned Counsel for for for the Respondents that if no specific period of the Respondents that if no specific period of the Respondents that if no specific period of limitation limitation limitation is is is provided, even then the provisions of the provided, even then the provisions of the provided, even then the provisions of the Limitation Limitation Limitation Act would be squarely applicable to the case Act would be squarely applicable to the case Act would be squarely applicable to the case under under under the the the Residuary Clause of the Limitation Act, which Residuary Clause of the Limitation Act, which Residuary Clause of the Limitation Act, which provides provides provides three three three years period for preferring an Appeal in years period for preferring an Appeal in years period for preferring an Appeal in such such such cases and the present Appeal was preferred even cases and the present Appeal was preferred even cases and the present Appeal was preferred even beyond beyond beyond the prescribed period of three years. the prescribed period of three years. the prescribed period of three years. 10. 10. 10. In In In our view, the dismissal of the appeal by the our view, the dismissal of the appeal by the our view, the dismissal of the appeal by the Grievance Grievance Grievance Committee on the count of the delay for the Committee on the count of the delay for the Committee on the count of the delay for the fault fault fault of the Appellant to make an application for of the Appellant to make an application for of the Appellant to make an application for condonation condonation condonation of the delay, has resulted in miscarriage of the delay, has resulted in miscarriage of the delay, has resulted in miscarriage of of of justice. Probably the fault can be attributed to justice. Probably the fault can be attributed to justice. Probably the fault can be attributed to lack lack lack of legal advise on the part of the Counsel of legal advise on the part of the Counsel of legal advise on the part of the Counsel representing representing representing the Appellant. It is a well settled the Appellant. It is a well settled the Appellant. It is a well settled principle principle principle of law that a litigant should not suffer for of law that a litigant should not suffer for of law that a litigant should not suffer for the the the fault fault fault of his Lawyer. Therefore, a fair opportunity of his Lawyer. Therefore, a fair opportunity of his Lawyer. Therefore, a fair opportunity can can can be granted to the Appellant to approach the be granted to the Appellant to approach the be granted to the Appellant to approach the Grievance Grievance Grievance Committee by granting liberty to the Committee by granting liberty to the Committee by granting liberty to the appellant appellant appellant to to to move an application for condonation of the move an application for condonation of the move an application for condonation of the delay, delay, delay, which obviously would be considered on merits, which obviously would be considered on merits, which obviously would be considered on merits, after after after hearing the parties. hearing the parties. hearing the parties. 11. 11. 11. Consequently, Consequently, Consequently, we quash and set aside the we quash and set aside the we quash and set aside the impugned impugned impugned Order with liberty to the Appellant to move Order with liberty to the Appellant to move Order with liberty to the Appellant to move the the the Grievance Committee by filing an application for Grievance Committee by filing an application for Grievance Committee by filing an application for condonation condonation condonation of the delay within a period of four weeks of the delay within a period of four weeks of the delay within a period of four weeks from from from the date of passing of this Order. the date of passing of this Order. the date of passing of this Order. 12. 12. 12. This This This Court makes it clear that if such an Court makes it clear that if such an Court makes it clear that if such an application application application is is is made, the Grievance Committee would hear made, the Grievance Committee would hear made, the Grievance Committee would hear the the the parties after giving the parties notice and fair parties after giving the parties notice and fair parties after giving the parties notice and fair opportunity opportunity opportunity and decide the application afresh without and decide the application afresh without and decide the application afresh without being being being influenced by its previous Order. influenced by its previous Order. influenced by its previous Order. 13. 13. 13. We, We, We, however, make it clear that if any such however, make it clear that if any such however, make it clear that if any such application application application is made beyond the stipulated period is made beyond the stipulated period is made beyond the stipulated period granted granted granted by this Court, the leave granted by this Court by this Court, the leave granted by this Court by this Court, the leave granted by this Court toto to move the Grievance Committee shall stand rejected. move the Grievance Committee shall stand rejected. move the Grievance Committee shall stand rejected. 14. 14. 14. With With With these observation, the Appeal stands these observation, the Appeal stands these observation, the Appeal stands disposed disposed disposed of with no Order as to costs. of with no Order as to costs. of with no Order as to costs. ..... ..... ..... [A. [A. [A. A.Sayed, J] A.Sayed, J] A.Sayed, J] [J.N.Patel, [J.N.Patel, [J.N.Patel, J.] J.] J.]