Bombay High Court
UP ZILLADHIKARI EGS AURANGABAD AND ANRversusPRITI CHANDRAKANT SOTRE AND ORS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
Condensation of the delay was not granted; the application for condonation of delay was rejected.
Summary
The petition sought condonation of a 579‑day delay in filing an appeal under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 against a Labour Court judgment dated 12 June 2023. The appeal was physically filed on 13 March 2025, but the mandatory statutory deposit required by the proviso to Section 30 was only made on 5 February 2026, rendering the filing ineffective until that date. The Court held that the date of filing must be treated as the date of deposit, thereby extending the delay to roughly 15 months plus an additional 11 months, for which no satisfactory explanation was provided. Consequently, the application failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for condoning such inordinate delay. The Court rejected the condonation application and disposed of all pending civil applications. It further directed that the respondents may withdraw the compensation amount deposited with the Compensation Commissioner.
Issues considered
- Whether the delay of 579 days in filing an appeal under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 can be condoned.
- Whether the date of statutory deposit determines the effective date of filing the appeal for the purpose of calculating delay.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Employees' Compensation Act
- Section 30
- statutory deposit
- condonation of delay
- appeal procedure
- civil application
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:45365
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
60 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10675 OF 2026
IN FAST/8349/2025
Priti Chandrakant Sotre And Ors.
VERSUS
Deputy Collector E G S, Dist Collector Office Campur Aurangabad And
Ors.
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Jadhav Pandharinath Ramrao
AGP for Respondents-State: Ms. M. L. Sangeet
Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. Avinash Katkar
Advocate for Respondents No.4 and 5 : Mr. S. M. Ganachari
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3093 OF 2025
IN FAST/8349/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3090 OF 2025
IN FAST/8349/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3092 OF 2025
IN FAST/8349/2025
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3121 OF 2025
IN FAST/8349/2025
…
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
Dated : September 29, 2026
ORDER :
1. Civil Application No.3090 of 2025 is filed seeking condonation of
delay of 579 days in filing an appeal under Section 30 of the
Employees' Compensation Act, 1923.
2. The appeal is filed in order to challenge the judgment and award
dated 12/06/2023 passed by the learned Labour Court No.1,
Aurangabad in Application WCA (C) No.13 of 2015.
Page 1 of 4
60 CA 10675-2026
3. It is stated in the application that after the said proceedings
were decided by the learned Labour Court on 12/06/2023, the
Government Pleader forwarded an opinion dated 08/09/2023 for
filing first appeal to the Collector. It is stated that on 09/12/2024, an
application for certified copy was made and the certified copy was
received on the next day, that is, on 10/12/2024.
4. It is again stated that after receiving the certified copy, the first
proposal was prepared by the office of the Government Pleader on
11/12/2024 and forwarded to the Department of Law and Judiciary. It
is informed that the proposal was initially rejected and, therefore, a
second proposal was forwarded on 31/12/2024, pursuant to which
approval for filing appeal was granted on 03/01/2025.
5. Perusal of the office record indicates that the appeal is filed on
13/03/2025. However, the statutory deposit as contemplated under
the proviso to Section 30 is made on 05/02/2026. Deposit of the
amount of compensation awarded by the Compensation
Commissioner is a mandatory pre-requisite for filing of an appeal
under the EC Act, 1923. By now, it is well settled that if an appeal is
filed without making statutory deposit, the filing of the appeal is
inconsequential.
Page 2 of 4
60 CA 10675-2026
6. In cases where the mandatory deposit is made after filing of
the appeal, the date of deposit of the amount, at best, can be
considered to be the date of filing of the appeal. In the present case,
although the appeal is physically filed on 13/03/2025, the actual date
of filing will have to be considered as 05/02/2026 i.e. the date of
deposit of the amount in compliance with the mandate of the proviso
to Section 30. The delay is counted only till 13/03/2025 which is also
incorrect. Delay shall be counted till the date of deposit of amount
which is after a period of around 11 months from the date of actual
filing of appeal.
7. Perusal of the application for condonation of delay will
demonstrate that there is no explanation at all for the delay of 15
months in moving the application for grant of certified copy or for
not depositing the amount with the learned Compensation
Commissioner earlier, when the appeal was filed. In view of the
aforesaid, the contents of the application, taken on their face value,
do not make out a case for condonation of inordinate delay of 579
days and further period of around 11 months till deposit of the
amount with the learned Commissioner of Compensation.
8. The application for condonation of delay is, therefore, rejected.
All pending civil applications stand disposed of.
Page 3 of 4
60 CA 10675-2026
9. Civil Application No.10675 of 2026. Since Civil Application
No.3092 of 2025, filed for condonation of delay is rejected, the
respondents/original claimants are at liberty to withdraw the amount
of compensation deposited by the appellant with the learned
Compensation Commissioner.
( ROHIT W. JOSHI, J. )
vj gawade/-.
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…