IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1305 of 2010 IN CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No. 6611 of 2010 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.7375 of 2010 WITH INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.7376 of 2010 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No.1305 of 2010 ==================================================== National Textile Corporation (Govt. of India Undertaking) through its Divisional Manager, Retail Marketing Division, S.P.Verma Road, P.S. Kotwali, Patna. …. …. Respondent-Appellant Versus 1. Arjun Bind S/o Ramu Bind Vill:Mansoor Nagar, Chhti Pahari, Sohdarai, Biharsarif, P.S. Sohsarai, Distt:Nalanda. …. …. Petitioner-Respondent 2. Zonal Manager, National Extile Corporation Ltd. Having its Regd. Office at 7 Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Kolkata. …. …. Respondent-Prof. Respondent ==================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. K.N.Gupta, Advocate with Mr. Satyendra Krishna Prasad, Advocate ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 2. 26.8.2010. Interlocutory Application No. 7375 of 2010:- This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by the appellant for condonation of delay of 29 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the delay in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned. - 2 - The Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. Letters Patent Appeal 1305 of 2010: - This appeal is preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the judgment and order dated 23rd April 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in the above C.W.J.C. No. 6611 of 2010. It appears that the appellant National Textile Corporation, issued the impugned order for recovery of Rs.71,100=78, being the shortfall in the stock, against the respondent-writ petitioner. The challenge to the recovery proceeding in above C.W.J.C. No. 6611 of 2010 has been upheld by the learned single Judge. Nevertheless, the learned single Judge has given liberty to the appellant Corporation to hold recovery proceeding keeping in view the service regulations and after active application of mind whether such proceeding could be initiated 13 years after the date of incidence. In view of the liberty given to the appellant Corporation, we are of the opinion that the impugned order does not warrant interference. The Appeal is dismissed in limine. The Interim Application stands disposed of. Pawan/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Jyoti Saran, J)