1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.521 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2818 OF 2008 (Mukhtar Khan s/o Ayyub Khan vs. Urdu Education Society and another) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri P.N. Shende, Advocate for appellant. Shri N.R. Saboo, Advocate for respondents. ----------- CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE AND P.B.VARALE, JJ. DATED : JUNE 28, 2010 Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This appeal is directed against the order dated 5/12/2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.2818/2008 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant against the order dated 14/3/2008 passed by the School Tribunal, Amravati Division, Amravati on the application (Exh.1). This application was filed by the appellant for condonation of delay in filing the application for 2 setting aside the dismissal order dated 6/10/2005 passed in Miscellaneous Application No.15/2005 and for restoration of the said application. The facts as reflected in paragraphs 3 to 5 in the order of the Tribunal read thus : “3/- The applicant had filed Appeal u/S 9(1) (a) of the MEPS Act, 1977 challenging the termination order dated 17/7/96, from the post of Assistant Teacher by respondent management. The said appeal bearing No.91/95 was filed on 19.7.95. In said appeal, the respondent management filed their Written Statement on 16.10.95. Since thereafter the appeal was for hearing and arguments. My learned predecessor dismissed the said appeal in default on 20/12/02 for non-appearance of the appellant/applicant. The applicant/appellant filed Misc. application No.15/05 on 9.8.05 for setting aside the dismissal order dated 20/12/02. In said appeal and restoration of said appeal, no application for condonation of delay was filed along with said application to condone the delay from 20.12.02 to 9.8.05. The said application was again dismissed by my learned predecessor on 6.10.05 for non- appearance of the applicant therein, i.e. present applicant. 4/- Later on, this applicant has filed one application bearing No. 24/2005 on 17/11/05 for reinstitution of Appeal No.24/2005 and application 3 15/05. The said application was totally vague and not in accordance with prescribed rules of drafting. On making queries by me, the applicant and his advocate has withdrawn said application with permission to file afresh application. The applicant has been allowed to withdraw said application with permission to file appropriate application in accordance with law and accordingly, said application was disposed of on 13.9.07. 5/- Thereafter, the applicant has filed afresh application for setting aside dismissal order dated 6.10.05 passed in Misc. A. No.15/05 and restoration of said application No.15/2005 and filed this application for condonation of delay of the period from 6.10.05 to 11.10.07.” We have also perused the application for condonation of delay filed by the appellant. We do not find any error committed by the learned Single Judge in dealing with writ petition. As has been rightly observed by the learned Single Judge, we do not find sufficient cause explaining the delay/period from 6.10.2005 onwards in the application. In view thereof and having considered the conduct of the appellant in prosecuting his appeal, as is seen from the facts reflected in the order of the Tribunal, the impugned order deserves no interference by this 4 Court in the instant appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE khj