1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3657 OF 2008 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL st. NO.7232/2008. Range Forest Officer Ghatanji, Yavatmal and others. .vs. Smt.Laxmibai Pardhi and others. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. Mr.M.P.Badar, Adv. for the appellant. Mr.Parihar, Adv. holding for Mr.N.R.Saboo, Adv. for respondents. Coram: ANOOP V. MOHTA and C.L.PANGARKAR, JJ. Dated : 18th SEPTEMBER, 2008. 1. This is an application for condonation of delay filed by the appellants – Officers of the Forest Department. There is a delay of one year and 143 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. The challenge is made to the order dated 8/11/2006 passed by the learned Single Judge of this court. The appellants received a letter along with the copy of judgment on 17/11/2006. By letter dated 2 15/1/2007, a request was made for according sanction for filing the Letters Patent Appeal. The same was granted vide letter dated 29/11/2007. Accordingly, by letter dated 14/12/2007 Deputy Conservator of Forest intimated to the Range Forest Officer, Ghatanji for contacting to the Government Pleader office, High Court, Nagpur. After collecting all necessary information and due verification, the present L.P.A. is preferred on 29/4/2008. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has objected on the ground that there is no sufficient material to file this Letters Patent Appeal. 3. We have noted the averments in additional affidavit dated 27/8/2008 which is reproduced as under - 2. From Joint Secretary, Law and Judiciary, information has been called. It has submitted that the proposal for sanction of preferring the L.P.A. was 3 examined by it and in view of Ruling of Full Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.M.Yellati ..vs.. Asstt. Executive Engineer, reported in 2005-III C.L.R.1028, it was considered to be not a fit matter to prefer L.P.A. and accordingly the Dy. Conservator of Forests was informed vide letter dated 14/2/2007. 3. Thereafter, Revenue and Forest Department considered certain decision, including decision in Umadevi's case, new changes in legal position and filing of Contempt Petitions by the labourers etc. requested to reconsider the position. 4. Papers were sent to P.S.Q., R.L.A. by Note dated 01/09/2007. Finally on 28/11/2007, on the insistence of Range Forest Officer, Q.F.D. and on the grounds stated decision to file LPA was taken by Joint Secretary, Law and Judiciary, Nagpur, and vide letter dated 29/11/2007, was communicated to the 4 Department. 5. Thus, due to these several legal and administrative difficulties so much time was required. The delay is bonafide. Taking all these into account, we are inclined to grant application as prayed in the interest of justice and also for the reason that the delay was not intentional. The application is accordingly allowed. The delay is condoned. JUDGE. JUDGE. chute