Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
NEERAJ TIWARI, VIVEK KUMAR SINGH
State of UP – Appellant
Versus
Mohan Lal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. delay in filing review application noted (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. state's explanation for delay is insufficient (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court analysis on delay and bureaucratic inefficiencies (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. judgment on the importance of sufficient cause for delay (Para 19 , 20 , 24) |
| 5. rejection of delay condonation and review petition (Para 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
Vivek Kumar Singh, J.
Re: Delay Condonation Application No.1 of 2025 in Civil Misc. Review Petition
1. Heard Shri Mohan Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the Applicants and Shri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Santosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party.
2. By means of this review application, the State of U.P. seeks review of the judgment and order dated 13.11.2009 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (C) No.34974 of 2001 (Mohan Lal vs. State of U.P. and Another), whereby the writ petition was allowed in favour of the petitioner.
3. There is a delay of 5743 days in filing the review application from the date of judgment under review herein.
4. The judgment and order dated 13.11.2009, which is under review before us, was e
The State must provide satisfactory reasons for delay in filing petitions; bureaucratic inefficiency is no excuse. Condonation of delay should not undermine the principles of timely justice.
“unavoidable” and “unspoken” circumstances cannot be taken shelter of to claim condonation of delay in approaching the Courts. In fact the course adopted by the State in preferring the review petitio....
The court ruled that a party cannot justify an inordinate delay in filing a review petition based on subsequent overruling of a prior decision, as it violates the principles of limitation and suffici....
Government departments must provide reasonable and acceptable explanations for delays in legal filings, emphasizing diligence in legal proceedings.
Government departments must provide reasonable explanations for delays in filing petitions; absence of sufficient cause results in dismissal of applications for condonation.
A liberal approach is essential in condoning delays, particularly for government bodies, ensuring that procedural delays do not hinder substantial justice.
The sufficiency of the cause for condoning delay is paramount, and a liberal interpretation of 'sufficient cause' is justified when no mala fides are present, despite the length of the delay.
The court endorsed a liberal approach to condoning delays in appeals, emphasizing substantial justice over technicality, while holding the State to the same standards as other litigants.
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
