2014 Supreme(SC) 339

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
GYAN SUDHA MISRA, V. GOPALA GOWDA, JJ.
STATE OF ASSAM & ORS. – APPELLANTS
VS.
SUSRITA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. – RESPONDENT
CIVIL APPEAL NO.4849 OF 2014 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) 14843 OF 2012)
Decided On : 23-04-2014

IMPORTANT POINT
While denying condonation of delay the public interest involved should not be lost sight of.

Headnote:(a) Constitution of India – Article 226 r/w High Court Rules, Letters Patent and section 5, Limitation Act – LPA dismissed on ground of delay – Appellant State Government – Delay of 9 months admitted – Malfunctioning of the State Government and its lackadaisical attitude towards pursuing matter in the court of law – Though unpardonable, cannot be the reason for loss of public property, involving public money and causing loss to the public exchequer – Matter ought to have heard on merits – Delay condoned. (Para 27)

       (1988) 2 SCC 142 – Relied upon

       (b) Administrative Law – Area of Tea garden heavily encroached, to the extent of 70% – Valuer opining a price of Rs.4,24,72,124/- – Respondent offering Rs.1.1 crore – Liquidator opining tea garden not capable of fetching price quoted by valuer– Liquidator reporting without making efforts at evicting encroachers – Not acceptable – Tender process initiated by the appellants held not legal – Fresh tender ordered – Respondents held entitled to refund of amount paid by them with interest. (Para 28, 29, 30, 33)

       (1993) 2 SCC 279; (1979) 3 SCC 489; (1980) 4 SCC 1; (2011) 5 SCC 29 – Relied upon

       (2002) 3 SCC 496 – Referred

       Facts of the case:

       The Government of Assam issued instructions in respect of alienation of tea garden land from time to time, requiring prior approval of the Government.

       On 30.10.2006, following the dissolution of Cachar Tea Farming and Industrial Cooperative Society, the Cachar Ex- Officio liquidator, Cachar Tea Farming and Industrial Cooperaive Society Ltd, issued a notice inviting tenders for the sale of Chincoorie Tea Estate owned by Cachar Tea Farming and Industrial Cooperative Society Ltd. The concerned tea estate measured 9951 bighas.

       The tender of the sale of the concerned land was floated without the prior approval of the government as required. The other codal formalities for tender process were not followed either.

       The respondent herein made a bid for Rs.1.11 crore. Another party, M/s Luxmi Township made a bid for Rs.1.05 crore. However, since the respondent had submitted his tender document by hand at 3:45 p.m., the same was objected by the other contender. The respondent was still considered the only valid bidder.

       The Liquidator subsequently cancelled the tender process by observing that the price quoted by the parties for the 9000 bighas of land is not at all justifiable.

       The respondent thereafter, filed a Writ Petition before the Guwahati High Court seeking directions for the Official respondents to issue final Order of award in its favour. The respondent further sought restrain order from cancelling the tender process and initiation of fresh tender process. The High Court restrained the Official respondents from initiating fresh process for the disposal of the land involved. The Order further clarified that it shall not be a bar to issue Order in favour of the respondent herein.

       The Registrar of the Co- operative Societies, permitted the Liquidator to dispose of the property involved in favour of the respondent herein.

       The Deputy Registrar (official liquidator) issued an award letter and thereafter, signed the agreement for sale of the tea garden land and sent a draft copy of the Deed of Agreement for the sale of the land in question.

       The sub-Registrar asked the liquidator to produce permission/approval from the Revenue Department for registration of the sale deed. The Liquidator however, could not produce the government permission for execution of the sale deed in respect of the land in question. Therefore, the sale deed could not be executed in favour of the respondent.

       The High Court held that since the amount has already been paid by the respondent to the Department, there is no question of taking further approval from the government. Therefore, the High Court directed the Deputy Registrar of the Co-operative Societies to follow up the execution of the sale deed in respect of the property and its registration.

       However, the sale deed did not get registered subsequently which was followed by a Contempt Case initiated by the respondent.

       The Legal Remambrancer observed that since loss of huge amount of public money to the tune of several crores is involved in the matter, the government might prefer an appeal before the Division Bench in wider public interest along with petition for condonation of delay.

       The High Court opined that the time lag between 2.2.2011 and 22.11.2011 has not at all been convincingly explained by the appellants. Though the State is in shackle by unavoidable official formalities to streamline its decision, however, the explanation offered by the appellants towards justification of the delay in filing the appeal is insufficient and it has dismissed the condonation of delay application and consequently dismissed the writ appeal.

       Finding of the Court:

       Impugned judgment cannot be sustained.

       Result: Appeal allowed.