Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 5560

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Sunita Agarwal, CJ, D.N.Ray, J
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Kishanbhai Nanalal Shah – Respondent
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 437 of 2026 | F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 39011 of 2025 | R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 19382 of 2021 | CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Hetal Patel
For the Respondents: A B Patel

State appeals filed with inordinate, unexplained delays and in direct contravention of binding Full Bench precedents regarding land ownership rights of non-resident agriculturists are liable to be dismissed, with the court stressing the necessity for the State to enforce its Litigation Policy and hold erring officials accountable.

Headnote:(A) Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Sections 63 and 84

(C) - Gujarat Land Revenue Rules, 1972 - Rule 108(6) - Letters Patent Appeal - Condonation of delay - Inordinate delay of 837 days in filing appeal - State litigation policy regarding delayed appeals - Binding effect of Full Bench decision regarding agriculturist status of persons from outside the state - High Court dismissed appeal finding no merit and noting that revenue officers were acting in defiance of binding court precedents.

Facts of the case:
The State filed an appeal against a decision of a learned Single Judge who had set aside orders passed by revenue authorities. The revenue authorities had initiated proceedings against the petitioner (who held land in the state) on the ground that he was not an agriculturist of the state, despite a Full Bench judgment holding that persons from outside the state could hold such land. The appeal was filed with an unexplained delay of 837 days, failing to follow the procedure mandated by the Gujarat State Litigation Policy.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the appeal was filed with inordinate delay and was also devoid of merits, as it sought to challenge a decision that merely followed a binding Full Bench precedent. The court expressed strong disapproval of the state's conduct in pursuing litigation to defend potentially contemptuous actions of its officers.

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the action of the revenue authorities against the respondent was legally sustainable in light of the binding Full Bench judgment.

Ratio Decidendi: An appeal filed with unexplained delay, particularly when it contradicts binding Full Bench precedents and ignores internal litigation policies on accountability, is liable to be dismissed. The state must adhere to its own litigation policies and binding judicial pronouncements rather than pursuing frivolous litigation at the cost of public exchequer.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. failure to explain inordinate delay in filing state appeals. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
2. adherence to state litigation policy and fixing accountability. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 37 , 38)
3. state cannot litigate against its own binding precedents. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44)

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. Having heard Ms.Hetal Patel, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the State appellants and perused the record, at the outset, it may be noted that the present State appeal is delayed by 837 days for which, no plausible explanation has been offered in the application seeking condonation of delay, other than that the matter remained pending at the levels of the officials of the Revenue Department and the Legal Department, to form an opinion to file the appeal.

2. As per the statement made in the application, intimation about the judgment impugned dated 08.08.2023 along with the opinion of the learned Assistant Government Pleader in the matter of filing of the Letters Patent Appeal was obtained on 13.09.2023, wherein it was opined to comply with the order dated 08.08.2023 or else to file the Letters Patent Appeal without delay.

3. Thereafter, the documents along with the checklist were sent to the Legal Department on 06.06.2024 with the request to seek permission to file the Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment impugned. On 02.07.2024, a letter has been sent to the Section Officer, Office of the learned Government Pleader, High Court of Gujarat by the Section Officer, Revenue Department, Gandhinagar to file appeal. Further, by the communication dated 30.06.2025, the documents were forwarded to the Office of the Government Pleader, High Court for filing the present appeal and on receipt of the said documents, it was drafted and filed.

4. The procedural delay in filing the present appeal casually explained with the assertions that there is no negligence or inaction on the part of the applicant, is wholly unacceptable. We may note that upon noticing frequent filing of delayed letters patent appeals (Intra-court appeals), directions were issued by this Court to formulate a litigation policy to provide a time bound process to form opinion for filing of letters patent appeal by the competent authority, so that the filing of frivolous and highly delayed State appeals may be curbed.

5. As a consequence, the amendment in the Gujarat State Litigation Policy has been notified on 29.06.2024 by the Legal Department of the State, which provides a checklist regarding proposals to be made by the Legal Department for seeking permission to assail the judgments before the appellate forums of the High Court or the Supreme Court.

6. The preamble of the original Gujarat State Litigation Policy, however, says that the State of Gujarat frames a policy which reflects a system of governance wedded to the principle “for the people” and more importantly, “for the welfare of the people”, through having reformed justice delivery system by the Executive Activism under the National Legal Mission to reduce average pendency time from 15 years to 1 year. The vision of the State Litigation Policy, as narrated therein, is the aim of the State of Gujarat to transform Government into an efficient and responsible litigant State by:-

i. ***

ii. ***

iii. Saving all avoidable costs on unproductive litigation;

iv. Reducing load (backlog of old cases) of judiciary whenever the Government is a litigant (party to the proceedings.)

7. The objectives of the litigation policy, as aligned therein, is to outline the broad guidelines on litigation strategies to be followed by the State Government or its agencies with a view to reduce litigation, saving avoidable cost on unproductive litigation, reducing avoidable filing in Courts, with respect to Governme

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 5560

Cases Referred (2)