2019 (5) TMI 1660 - SCH - Indian Laws

Condonation of delay of 728 days in filing SLP - Cause for dely shown is the petitioner State is filing the present special leave petition after obtaining all the sanctions from the respective departments and took time to receive the affidavit and vakalatnama from the concerned department, hence there is delay. HELD THAT - We are of the view that a clear signal has to sent to the Government Authorities that they cannot approach the Court as and when they please, on account of gross incompetence of their officers and that too without taking any action against the concerned officers. No detail of this delay of 728 days have been given as if there is an inherent right to seek condonation of delay by State Government. The law of limitation apparently does not apply to the State Government according to its conduct. We, thus, dismiss the special leave petition on delay and impost cost on the petitioners of ₹ 20,000/-to be recovered from the officers responsible for this delay and be deposited with the Supreme Court Mediation Centre, within four weeks. Certificate of recovery be filed in this court. SLP dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Appeal against delay in filing, condonation of delay, approach of Government Authorities, imposition of costs, better management of legal cases.

Analysis:
1. Delay in Filing Appeal:
The petitioner-State of Bihar filed an appeal against a Single Judge's order before the Division Bench after a delay of 367 days. The Division Bench rejected the application for condonation of delay, citing insufficient cause. Subsequently, a special leave petition was filed with a delay of 728 days, attributing the delay to administrative processes within the State Government.

2. Condonation of Delay:
The Supreme Court noted that the State Government's delay of 728 days in filing the special leave petition was not adequately explained. The Court emphasized that Government Authorities cannot approach the Court at their convenience due to incompetence of officers, without taking action against those responsible. It was highlighted that condonation of delay cannot be sought on the basis of Government working lethargy.

3. Imposition of Costs:
The Court strongly criticized the casual approach of the Division Bench and the petitioners in approaching the Court, implying a possible attempt to obtain a dismissal certificate. As a consequence, the special leave petition was dismissed due to delay, and costs of ?20,000 were imposed on the petitioners. The Court directed recovery of the costs from the officers responsible for the delay, to be deposited with the Supreme Court Mediation Centre within four weeks.

4. Better Management of Legal Cases:
In addition to the dismissal of the special leave petition and imposition of costs, the Chief Secretary of the State of Bihar was directed to oversee the matter to ensure improved management of legal cases in the future. This directive aimed at preventing similar delays and inefficiencies in the handling of legal matters by the State Government.

Overall, the judgment highlighted the importance of adherence to timelines, accountability within Government Authorities, and efficient management of legal cases to avoid unnecessary delays and wastage of judicial resources.