IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 7618 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 21st July, 2010. The Modern Cooperative Transport Society & Ors. Petitioners through Mr. I.P.Goyat, Advocate Versus The State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Haryana at Ambala & Ors. Respondents through Mr. R.D.Sharma, DAG, Haryana. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The petitioners who are Cooperative Transport Societies, are aggrieved at the order dated 16.04.2010 [Annexure P-15] passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge-cum-State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Ambala, whereby their application for condonation of delay of 244 days in filing of the statutory appeal has been declined and consequently, the appeal has been dismissed being time barred. The petitioners had preferred the aforementioned appeal against the order dated 20.05.2009 [Annexure P-4] passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Ambala. It is not in dispute that the petitioners had filed a civil suit even before passing of the aforementioned order which was later on withdrawn by them on 11.02.2010 and after obtaining a certified copy of the impugned order, they filed the appeal on 22.02.2010. There was, thus, a delay of 244 days. The Appellate Tribunal has declined to press Section 14 of the Limitation Act into aid of the petitioners on the ground that the civil suit pursued by them lacked bona-fide as they continued with it even after the ad-interim injunction had been declined. In some-what similar situation where there was a delay of 238 days in filing of the appeal as earlier the appellant had filed a civil suit, the Appellate Tribunal vide its order dated 22.2.2010 held as follows:- “It is not disputed that civil suit was filed by the appellants and ad-interim injunction was also granted. The contention of the appellants was that the impugned order dated 20.05.2009 was ante dated by the respondents. Be that as it may it is a question to be decided on merits. It is settled by now that litigation be decided on merits rather than on technicalities. Therefore, the application is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. Appeal is admitted however subject to payment of Rs.500/- as costs to be deposited with Legal Aid Authority, Ambala. Appeal is being admitted conditionally on deposit of costs within one month from today failing which the consequences would follow”. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears that in order to maintain consistency in the matter of exercising the judicial discretion, the Appellate Tribunal ought to have condoned the delay in the case of the petitioners also, who too have been erroneously pursuing the remedy of civil suit. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed to the extent that the impugned order dated 16.04.2010 passed by the learned District Judge-cum-State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Ambala, is set aside and the matter is remitted to the said Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh and on merits, in accordance with law. Disposed of. Dasti. July 21, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE