Government entities must now show sufficient cause for delay in legal proceedings, ensuring accountability equal to private litigants, as established in Supreme Court jurisprudence.

JUDGMENT :

N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J.

Heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the applicant/appellant. Also heard Mr. K.N. Chouhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. D.J. Das, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.

2. The present interlocutory application has been instituted invoking the provisions of Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, praying for condonation of delay of 258 days in instituting the connected writ appeal, assailing the judgment and order dated 29-10-2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 1053/2024.

3. Before considering the contentions raised in the present interlocutory application, it would be apt to notice the facts leading to institution of the connected appeal by the applicants, herein.

The opposite party No. 1, who was a member of the Assam Civil Service, while serving as the Chief Executive Officer, Darrang Zilla Parishad came to be placed under arrest on 22-09-2017 by the Vigilance and Anticorruption Cell, Assam in connection with ACB P.S. Case No. 24/2017, under Section 7/13(1)(D)/13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. On his arrest in connection with the said case the opposite party No. 1 was vide notification dated 12-10-2017 placed under suspension w.e.f. the date of his arrest.

Thereafter, a show-cause notice dated 09-02-2018 came to be issued to the opposite party, instituting a departmental proceeding against him, basing of allegation similar to the one alleged against him in the pending criminal proceedings.

The opposite party No. 1, submitted his show-cause reply, however, the same being found to be not satisfactory, a departmental enquiry came to be ordered and for conduct of the same a Enquiry Officer and a Presenting Officer, came to be appointed.

As the departmental proceeding instituted against the petitioner, was pending, the criminal proceedings instituted against the opposite party was proceeded with and on conclusion of the trial, the learned Special Judge, Assam vide judgment and order dated 19-07-2023, passed in Special Case No. 32/2017, proceeded to acquit the opposite party from the charges framed against him, therein.

The opposite party No. 1, by projecting his acquittal in Special Case No. 32/2017, approached the departmental authorities, praying for dropping of the departmental proceedings instituted against him.

The departmental authorities having not closed the departmental proceeding, the opposite party No. 1 approached the writ court by way of instituting a writ petition, being W.P.(C) No. 1053/2024, assailing the action on the part of the applicants, herein, in continuing with the departmental proceedings, against him.

The learned Single Judge, upon examining the issues arising, proceeded vide judgment and order dated 29-10-2024 to dispose of W.P.(C) No. 1053/2024, by directing the applicants, herein, to conclude the departmental proceedings pending against the opposite party No. 1, herein, within a period of 01 (one) month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order. It is to be noted that the learned Single Judge had also concluded that continuation of the departmental proceeding against the opposite party No. 1, in view of his acquittal basing on similar charge in the criminal proceeding, was wholly unfair and unjustified.

The departmental proceedings having not been concluded within the timeframe prescribed by the learned Single Judge, the applicants, herein, instituted an interlocutory application being I.A.(C) No. 3844/2024 (in W.P.(C) No. 1053/2025), seeking extension of time for concluding the departmental proceedings, instituted against the petitioner.

The learned S