9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 533X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A perusal of paragraphs 3 to 8 of the application of condonation of delay would indicate that a very cavalier and casual attitude has been shown by the revisionist in filing the instant revision inasmuch as file and papers/permissions have been shunted from one desk to the other. Even though the file has reached the ultimate destination for drafting of the revision i.e to the concerned learned counsel for drafting of the revision in August, 2019 yet it has taken more than four months for the revision to be drafted despite limitation period of three months being prescribed under the statute for filing of a revision. The application for condonation of delay in all the aforesaid revisions having been rejected, the revisions are dismissed. - Sales/Trade Tax Revision Defective No. - 6 of 2020, 12 of 2020, 9 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 7-9-2022 - Hon'ble Abdul Moin, J. For the Revisionist : C.S.C. For the Opposite Party : Pradeep Agrawal ORDER HON'BLE ABDUL MOIN, J. C.M.Application No. 14304 of 2020, C.M.Application No. 21052 of 2020 C.M.Application No. 15793 of 2020 1. Heard learned Standing counsel appearing for the revisionist and S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of India Vs. Central Tibetan Schools Admin and Ors reported in (2021) SCC Online 119 wherein after placing reliance on the judgment of Living Media India Ltd (supra) the Apex Court has refused to condone the delay and has dismissed the Special Leave to Petition with a strong warning to the department. Reliance has also been placed on another recent judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Chennai Vs Volex Interconnect (India) Pvt. Ltd reported in (2022) 3 SCC 159. 6. Placing reliance of the aforesaid judgments, it is argued that the application for condonation of delay merits to be dismissed as the revisions have been filed with substantial delay. 7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the contesting parties and having perused the reasons indicated in the application for condonation of delay it emerges that the order of the learned Tribunal is dated 23.04.2019. The revision itself has been filed after a delay of 163 days. The reasons have been indicated in paragraphs 3 to 8 of the said application by indicating that initially a proposal had been sent for filing of a revision petition and thereafter the documents were sent. Lat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ile was kept pending for several months/years due to considerable degree of procedural red tape in the process. The government departments are under a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. Condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for the government departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few. 9. Likewise, the Apex Court in the case of of Central Tibetan Schools (supra) has held as under:- 4. We have heard the learned Additional Solicitor General for some time and must note that the only error which seems to have occurred in the impugned order [Union of India v. Central Tibetan Schools Admn., 2018 SCC OnLine Del 13371] is of noticing that it is not an illiterate litigant because the manner in which the Government is prosecuting its appeal reflects nothing better! The mighty Government of India is manned with a large Legal Department having numerous officers and advocates. The excuse given for the delay is, to say the least, preposterous. 5. We have repeatedly been counselling through our orders va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and save the skin of the officers who may be in default in following the due process or may have done it deliberately. We have deprecated such practice and process and we do so again. We refuse to grant such certificates and if the Government/public authorities suffer losses, it is time when officers concerned responsible for the same, bear the consequences. The irony, emphasised by us repeatedly, is that no action is ever taken against the officers and if the Court pushes it, some mild warning is all that happens. 8. Looking to the gross negligence and the impunity with which the Union of India had approached this Court in a matter like this, we consider it appropriate to impose special costs of Rs 1 lakh in this case to be recovered from the officer(s) concerned, to be deposited with the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Welfare Fund within four weeks. 9. The special leave petitions are dismissed as time-barred in terms aforesaid. Pending application stands disposed of. 10. Incidentally, the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Central Tibetan Schools (supra) is a judgment by three Hon'ble Judges. 11. The Apex Court in the case of Volex Inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
