News Citation : 2026 LN (HC) 105 | 2026:CGHC:2666-DB
January 16, 2026 : The High Court of Chhattisgarh has dismissed a writ appeal filed by Smt. Jayanti Chauhan after refusing to condone a delay of 33 days in approaching the court, holding that financial hardship and ignorance of legal remedies do not amount to “sufficient cause” under law.
A Division Bench comprising Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice, and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed the appeal on January 16, 2026, affirming an earlier order of a Single Judge who had rejected Chauhan’s writ petition in September 2025.
The appeal arose from an application seeking condonation of a 33-day delay in filing the writ appeal against the dismissal of her service-related writ petition. When queried by the Bench, counsel for the appellant failed to offer any cogent or plausible explanation justifying the delay. The State opposed the plea, arguing that the appeal was barred by limitation and suffered from delay and laches.
After examining the record, the court noted that the law on limitation is well settled and that delay can only be condoned upon a clear demonstration of “sufficient cause.” Relying on recent Supreme Court jurisprudence, the Bench reiterated that limitation laws are founded on public policy and cannot be diluted merely on sympathetic grounds.
The court observed that poverty, lack of legal advice, or ignorance of available remedies, while unfortunate, do not by themselves justify condoning delay. It emphasised that negligence, inaction, or lack of diligence on the part of a litigant cannot be overlooked under the guise of advancing substantial justice.
The judges further held that once the statutory period of limitation expires, a valuable right accrues to the opposite party, which cannot be lightly taken away. In the present case, the appellant failed to point out any circumstance arising within the limitation period that prevented her from filing the appeal in time.
Concluding that no case for condonation was made out, the Bench rejected the delay condonation application. As a consequence, the writ appeal was dismissed at the threshold on the ground of delay and laches.
Case Reference : WA No. 14 of 2026, Smt. Jayanti Chauhan vs State of Chhattisgarh; Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. Sumit Singh Rathore, Advocate; Counsel for the Respondent/State: Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Deputy Advocate General.
