Vice Chancellor And ANR. v. Dr. Gopi Krishna Das Assoc. Professor And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No. 155 of 2015

1. Vice Chancellor, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Krishak Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)

2. Registrar, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Krishak Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) .

---- Appellants

Versus

1. Dr. Gopi Krishna Das (Assoc. Professor), S/o Shri Narayan Das Vaishnava, aged about 39 years, Deptt. of Agronomy, IGAU, Raipur (C.G.). Residential Address: Shyam Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)

2. Indian Council of Agricultural Research through Secretary, Krishi Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi.

3. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Krishi Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi.

4. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Appellants :

Shri B.D. Guru and Shri Rajendra Tripathi, Advocates.

For Respondent Nos.1 & 2 :

Shri H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

For Respondent No.3 :

Shri R.K. Kesharwani, Advocate.

For Respondent No.4/ State :

Shri B. Gopa Kumar, Deputy Advocate General.

HON'BLE SHRI NAVIN SINHA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE SHRI P SAM KOSHY, J.

Order On Board Per NAVIN SINHA, ACTING C.J.

27/03/2015 1.

I.A. No. 01 of 2015 has been filed to condone delay of 1889 days in filing the present appeal arising out of Writ Petition No. 638 of 2003 disposed with a batch of approximately over 30 writ applications.

2.

The Appellants originally filed only one Writ Appeal No.106 of 2011 with regard to the analogous order in Writ Petition No. 254 of 2002. The writ appeal was dismissed on 22.01.2015 by a reasoned order on the ground of a selective appeal having been filed even while no appeal had been filed in the other writ petitions with which the Appellants were aggrieved also. 3.

Writ Appeal No. 106 of 2011 was dismissed alongwith Writ appeal No.449 of 2010 preferred by Respondent No.2. In Writ Appeal No.449 of 2010, the present Appellants were impleaded as Respondent Nos.2 and 3. 4.

Against the order in Writ Appeal No. 449 of 2010, M.C.C. No. 143 of 2015 was preferred for review to recall the order dated 22.01.2015 as the Petitioner therein had decided to prefer separate writ appeals against each order in the writ petition. The review application was dismissed on 23.03.2015.

5.

In the meantime, Writ Appeal No. 81 of 2015 and several other writ appeals were subsequently filed by the present Respondent No.2 alongwith the applications for condoning 1862/1863 days of delay which was dismissed on 17.03.2015 by a reasoned order declining to condone delay. 6.

We have heard Counsel for the parties.

7.

The present appeal is also barred by 1889 days of delay. The explanation for the delay is similar as that in Writ Appeal No. 81 of 2015. 8.

For like reasons discussed in the order dated 17.03.2015 in Writ Appeal No. 81 of 2015 several other appeals have been dismissed declining to condone delay. For the same reasons we decline to condone the grave and extraordinary delay of 1889 days in the present appeal for which no sufficient cause has been furnished.

9.

I.A. No. 01 of 2015 for condonation of delay is dismissed. 10.

Consequently, the appeal itself fails.

(Navin Sinha) (P. Sam Koshy) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE sunita