High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2544/2017dismissed

Mohan Lal Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-06-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2544 of 2017 Mohan Lal Sharma S/o. Makhan Lal Sharma, Aged About 45 Years Working As Assistant Internal Audit And Taxation Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bodla, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat & Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Commissioner, Division Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

3. Collector, Kabirdham, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh

4. Sub Divisional Officer ( Revenue), Bodla, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

5. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Bodla, District Kabeerdham (Chhattisgarh).

6. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For petitioner :

Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent / State :

Ms. K. Tripti Rao, Panel Lawyer on advance copy Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 19/06/2017 This petition is directed against order dated 09/02/2017 by which, the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed as barred by limitation. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that though the petitioner has come out with sufficient and cogent reason as to why the petitioner had not filed appeal within the period of limitation, the application was rejected perfunctorily without due consideration.

In the application for condonation of delay in filing appeal, it was stated that the petitioner, upon receiving the order of penalty was disappointed. The other ground stated is that at the time when he obtained the order of penalty, he became sick but no details have been given nor any medical certificate has been filed to show period of illness.

I find, the order which was appealed against was only of imposition of a minor penalty against the petitioner. Therefore, in these circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti