Corporations classified as 'State' under Article 12 of the Constitution do not qualify for benefits under Article 112 of the Limitation Act, as it is limited to 'Central Government' and 'State Government'.

O R D E R

Ashok Bhushan, Ag.CJ.

This Review Petition is filed by the applicant/appellant to review the judgment dated 30th March, 2012 in W.A.No.220 of 2012. The Writ Appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench after hearing learned counsel for the appellant. The Division Bench in its judgment has held that Article 112 of the Limitation Act, 1963 shall not be attracted and the appellant cannot claim that the loan disbursed by the appellant is covered by Article 112 of the Limitation Act.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant, in support of the application, contended that the applicant is functioning within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. He submits that since the applicant is the State, it RP.801/12 2 ought to have extended the benefit of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

3. We have considered the submissions. The mere fact that the applicant claims to be State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India does not lead to the conclusion that the applicant can claim benefit of Article 112 of the Limitation Act. Article 112 of the Limitation Act uses the words 'State Government' and 'Central Government'. The said issue has been considered by several High Courts and it has been held that the State within the meaning of Article 112 is not used in Article 112 of the Limitation Act. Reference is made to the judgment in Indira Nigam v. State of U.P (Laws (ALL) 2013 (10) 119). Paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 of the judgment read as under:

“8. On the other hand, Sri Dev Brat Mukherjee, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the period of limitation for recovery of dues by the Corporation shall be only three years as per Limitation Act either RP.801/12 3 Article 19 or Article 21. Sri Mukherjee further submits that Article 112 shall not be applicable in the present case since action has not been taken by the State Government rather recovery certificate has been issued by the Corporation. It is submitted that the benefit of Article 112 cannot be extended to the Corporation and the said Article is applicable only with regard to Central Government or any State Government. Whether Article 112 of the Limitation Act can be taken recourse by the corporation in the facts of the present case, is the moot question to be answered. A particular period of limitation for filing a suit by the Central government or State Government has been provided for in the Statute of Limitation for a purpose and object. The challenge to Article 149 of the Limitation Act, 1908 which was pari - materia to Article 113 of the 1963 Act, was considered and repelled by the apex Court in AIR 1961 SC 1704 Nav Rattanmal and others Vs. State of Rajasthan . While noticing the purpose and object of Article 149 of the Limitation Act, apex Court laid down following in paragraph 10:

RP.801/12 4 “10...... It is with this background that the question of the special provision contained in art. 149 of the Act has to be viewed. First, we have the fact that in the case of the Government, if a claim becomes barred by limitation, the loss falls on the public, i.e., on the community in general and to the benefit of the private individual who derives advantage by the lapse of time. This itself would appear to indicate a sufficient ground for differentiating between the claims of an individual and the claims of the community at large. Next, it may be mentioned that in the case of governmental machinery, it is a known fact that it does not move as quickly as in the case of individuals. Apart from the delay occurring in the proper officers ascertaining that a cause of action has accrued - Government being an impersonal body, before a claim is launched there has to be inter - departmental correspondence, consultations, sanctions obtained RP.801/12 5 according to the rules. These necessarily take time and it is because of these features which are sometimes characterised as red - tape that there is delay in the functioning of government offices.......”

T