SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(SC) 771

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.
The State of Madhya Pradesh and Another – Petitioners
Versus
Chaitram Maywade – Respondent
Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 13348 of 2020
Decided On : 27-10-2020

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Ms. Ankita Choudhary, Mr. Arjun Garg, Ms. Rati Tandon.

Headnote:

Special Leave Petition - Period of delay - Detailed order in that case and Court see no purpose in repeating same reasoning again except to record what are stated to be facts on which delay is sought to be condoned - On, it is stated that Government advocate was approached in respect of judgment delivered and Law Department permitted filing of SLP against impugned order - Thus, Law Department took almost about 17 months’ time to decide whether SLP had to be filed or not - What greater certificate of incompetence would there be for legal Department - Court consider it appropriate to direct Chief Secretary of State of Madhya Pradesh to look into aspect of revamping legal Department as it appears that Department is unable to file appeals within any reasonable period of time much less within limitation - These kinds of excuses, as already recorded in aforesaid order, are no more admissible in view of judgment - Whether SLP had to be filed or not - Held, Court have also expressed Court concern that these kinds of cases are only “certificate cases” to obtain a certificate of dismissal from Supreme Court to put a quietus to issue - Object is to save skin of officers who may be in default – Court have also recorded the irony of situation where no action is taken against the officers who sit on these files and do nothing - period of delay and casual manner in which application has been worded, wastage of judicial time involved, Court impose cost on petitioner/State to be deposited with Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee - Amount be deposited within four weeks - Amount be recovered from officers responsible for delay in filing and sitting on files and certificate of recovery of said amount be also filed in this Court within said period of time - Special Leave Petition is dismissed

ORDER :

I.A. No. 67822/2020 - Application for condonation of delay

1. The State of Madhya Pradesh continues to do the same thing again and again and the conduct seems to be incorrigible. The Special Leave Petition has been filed after a delay of 588 days. We had an occasion to deal with such inordinately delayed filing of the appeal by the State of Madhya Pradesh in SLP (C) D. No. 9217/2020, State of Madhya Pradesh and Others vs. Bheru Lal in terms of our order dated 15th October, 2020.

2. We have penned down a detailed order in that case and we see no purpose in repeating the same reasoning again except to record what are stated to be the facts on which the delay is sought to be condoned. On 05.01.2019, it is stated that the Government advocate was approached in respect of the judgment delivered on 13.11.2018 and the Law Department permitted filing of the SLP against the impugned order on 26.5.2020. Thus, the Law Department took almost about 17 months’ time to decide whether the SLP had to be filed or not. What greater certificate of incompetence would there be for the legal Department.

3. We consider it appropriate to direct the Chief Secretary of the State of Madhya Pradesh to look into the aspect of revamping the legal Department as it appears that the Department is unable to file appeals within any reasonable period of time much less within limitation. These kinds of excuses, as already recorded in the aforesaid order, are no more admissible in view of the judgment in Office of the Chief Post Master General and Others vs. Living Media India Ltd. and Another, (2012) 3 SCC 563.

4. We have also expressed our concern that these kinds of the cases are only “certificate cases” to obtain a certificate of dismissal from the Supreme Court to put a quietus to the issue. The object is to save the skin of officers who may be in default. We have also recorded the irony of the situation where no action is taken against the officers who sit on these files and do nothing.

5. Looking to the period of delay and the casual manner in which the application has been worded, the wastage of judicial time involved, we impose cost on the petitioner/State of Rs. 35,000/- to be deposited with the Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee. The amount be deposited within four weeks. The amount be recovered from the officers responsible for the delay in filing and sitting on the files and certificate of recovery of the said amount be also filed in this Court within the said period of time.

6. We have put to Deputy Advocate General to caution that for any successive matters of this kind the cost will keep on going up.

7. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed as time barred in terms aforesaid.

8. We make it once again clear that the order is not complied within time, we may be constrained to initiate contempt proceedings against the Chief Secretary.

9. A copy of the order be also placed before the Chief Secretary for the State of Madhya Pradesh.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top