Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, C.J., G.ARUL MURUGAN
Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs – Appellant
Versus
G. Ronak Jain, S/o. Shri N. Gyanchand Jain – Respondent
ORDER :
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ.
In support of the prayer in CMP No.23122 of 2025 seeking condonation of delay of 258 days, all that has been stated in the affidavits is as below:
“3. It is submitted that there is a delay of 258 days in filing the Writ Appeal against the Impugned Order, dated 20.9.2024 passed in W.P.No.28214/2021. It is submitted that we had to obtain Departmental Sanction to file the Writ Appeal. It is further submitted that the Ministry of Law had originally appointed a Senior Panel Counsel, who had subsequently could not file as his term was not extended by the Central Government. Thereafter, the Present Counsel has been nominated by the Ministry of Law, Chennai Branch Secretariat.
4. It is submitted that due to the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Appeal could not be filed within time and a delay of 258 days has arisen. It is submitted that the delay in filing the Writ Appeal is neither wilful nor wanton, but due to the aforesaid unavoidable circumstances beyond the control of the petitioners/appellants and it is therefore just and necessary to condone the delay of 258 days in filing the present Writ Appeal against the Impugned Order, dated 20.9.2024 passed in W
The court emphasized that administrative inaction does not justify delay in legal proceedings, and that adequate cause must be shown, especially by State authorities.
Government agencies must provide sufficient justification for delays in legal filings; bureaucratic inefficiencies are not valid grounds for condonation of delay.
State bodies must provide substantial reasons for delay in legal filings, as administrative inefficiencies do not constitute sufficient cause for condonation.
Administrative inefficiencies alone do not constitute sufficient cause for condoning delays, and government entities must demonstrate diligence in litigation.
State authorities are held to strict standards in explaining delays in litigation; administrative lethargy is insufficient for condoning delays.
Sufficient cause for condonation of delay must be established; administrative inefficiencies are not valid grounds for extending time limits.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
