'Union Cannot Have Its Own Limitation Period' : Supreme Court Flags Delay In Govt Appeals

The Supreme Court yesterday (December 15) dismissed three matters simultaneously and refused to condone the delay after orally remarking that the Union Government officers are not diligent enough to file within the permissible time.A bench comprising Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing the matters in which Additional Solicitor General Archana Dave Pathak appeared for the Union. These were matters in which the Union Government had preferred the special leave petitions challenging the orders of the High Court.Without going into the merits, Justice Misra asked what justification the Union Government officers have in not filing the SLP on time. He remarked that the Court has noted the lack of diligence on the part of the Union to pursue the matter within the permissible limitation period in quite a few matters recently. "These are all matters where you have come with a long delay and we are dismissing all these matters on the ground of delay. In only one of the case the delay is less, but in that case, you had been delayed before the High Court. It was dismissed on grounds of delay. We dismissed all these matters about a week back only on the ground of delay following Shivamma's judgment. Unless you have a very cogent explanation, we are not going to condone the delay. We have become very harsh," Justice Misra said.Initially, ASG Pathak was not present as she was engaged in another matter, and the Court passed an order dismissing one matter consisting of a batch of appeals of more than 5 matters. "In all these petitions, the delay and the office has reported that they are beyond time by 103, 297, 256, 134,323, 214, and 136 days respectively. We don't find a satisfactory explanation for condoning delays. Therefore, in light of the decision of this Court in Shivamma Kumar.."In Shivamma, a bench Justice JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan warned High Courts not to condone inordinate delays by State agencies on grounds of administrative lethargy and laxity. In this case, it had to set aside the order of the Karnataka High Court, which condoned a delay of 11 years by the Karnataka Housing Board in filing a second appeal against a decree.As the Court was completing the order, ASG Pathak appeared and requested that she may be heard. She submitted that there is one matter where the delay is only 49 days. But the Court said it will dismiss this matter on the merits through a separate order. This pertains to the matter which the High Court had dismissed on a delay,and the Court refused to interfere, finding that no cogent explanation was given to the High Court when seeking the condonation of the delay.Justice Misra remarked:"See the order of the High Court. Why the High Court dismissed? Your petition is filed beyond 2 years. If the High Court has refused to exercise its discretion on the jurisdiction on grounds of delay, why should we interfere? In this case, the period of delay was about 2 years and Court already had dismissed the matters on that ground and what is the explanation for the condonation for delay? We have already taken a view in light of Shivamma judgment that you will not be given a liberty to carve out your own limitation period for filing. Once we take that view... Principle of law is there that you have to have an explanation for the delay and just passing on file from one table to other is a not an explanation for the condonation of delay."ASG Pathak reasoned that there are two ministries involved in this matter, and therefore, the delay. After the Court dismissed these matters, the two subsequent matters were also dismissed on grounds of delay. "If you are not diligent, we will dismiss all 50 matters and not just 30-40. Here also delay of 268 days. Same order. This is also 290 days! What is this? Dismissed...We are dismissing on delay and there is no question on adjudication on merits.," Justice Misra ordered.In the last few months, the Supreme Court benches have time and again cautioned the Union Government to approach the Court within the timeframe.Related - 'It Appears Union Wants To Fix Its Own Period Of Limitation' : Supreme Court Rejects Govt's Time-Barred Challenge In 43-Year-Old Suit

'Union Cannot Have Its Own Limitation Period' : Supreme Court Flags Delay In Govt Appeals

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags