Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

UP ZILLADHIKARI EGS AURANGABAD AND ANRversusPRITI CHANDRAKANT SOTRE AND ORS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The application for condonation of delay is rejected, and the appeal is deemed not to have been filed within the prescribed period.

Summary

The petitioners sought condonation of a 579‑day delay in filing an appeal under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923, challenging a Labour Court award dated 12‑06‑2023. The appeal was physically filed on 13‑03‑2025, but the mandatory statutory deposit required by the proviso to Section 30 was only made on 05‑02‑2026, which the Court held to be the effective filing date. The petitioners offered no satisfactory explanation for the prolonged delay in obtaining a certified copy of the judgment or for the late deposit of the compensation amount. The Court reiterated that an appeal filed without the statutory deposit is inconsequential and that the delay must be measured up to the date of deposit. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay was rejected as the delay was inordinate and unexplained. All pending civil applications were ordered disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the Court may condone a delay of 579 days (plus additional delay until statutory deposit) in filing an appeal under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act, 1923.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Employees' Compensation Act
  • Section 30
  • condonation of delay
  • statutory deposit
  • appeal procedure
  • labour court judgment
  • civil application

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:45368

                     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


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.