PRAYER in C.M.P.No.14190 of 2026 : Petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 1568 days in filing the appeal.

PRAYER in WA SR No.81180 of 2026 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 14.12.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.12897 of 2017.

JUDGMENT

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

In support of the prayer seeking condonation of delay of 1568 days, all that has been stated in the affidavit is as below:

“16. It is submitted that the Appellant 1 & 2 and the staff searched all the records. Since the documents pertaining to several decades a detail search was conducted for verifying the documents. In the meanwhile there is delay in filing this Writ appeal. The reasons for delay are as follows:

1) Due to Covid – 2019 entire staff under the control of this Appellant, have deputed for eradication in various places and in check post duty.

2) Due to frequent law and order problems.

3) Due to General Election to State Assembly.

4) Due to Lok Sabha Election.

5) Due to Flood relief work.

6) Furthermore, it took a long time to obtain the necessary documents from various offices to file a second appeal on the Appeal suit case and to file the Appeal.

17. It is submitted that there is a delay of 1568 days in filing Writ Appeal. The said delay is neither wilfull nor wanton one and it is due to the administrative reasons. There are fair chances of success to the Petitioners/Appellants herein in this Writ Appeal. Unless the delay is condoned the Petitioners/Appellants herein would be put to much hardship, whereas no hardship would be caused to the respondent/respondent herein. Hence, it is just and necessary to condone the delay of 1568 days in filing this Writ Appeal against the order of this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.12897 of 2017 dated: 14.12.2021.”

2. To say the least, no cause, much less sufficient cause, has been shown. It appears that the officials concerned dealing with the files were completely indolent and sat over the matter without doing anything.

3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in umpteen number of judgments, held that the period of limitation is required to be explained by the State and it does not stand on any exalted position.

(i) In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. V. Bherulal¹(2020) 10 SCC 654, it was found that the appeal filed by the State was with delay of 663 days. The cause shown for inordinate delay in that case was due to unavailability of documents and the process of arranging documents and also a reference to bureaucratic process works. In the aforesaid factual context, Their Lordships of the Supreme Court, observed as below:

"3. No doubt, some leeway is given for the Government inefficiencies but the sad part is that the authorities keep on relying on judicial pronouncements for a period of time when technology had not advanced and a greater leeway was given to the Government (Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. MANU/SC/0460/1987 : (1987) 2 SCC 107). This position is more than elucidated by the judgment of this Court in Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. MANU/SC/0132/2012 : (2012) 3 SCC 563 where the Court observed as under:

"27. It is not in dispute that the person(s) concerned were well aware or conversant with the issues involved including the prescribed period of limitation for taking up the matter by way of filing a special leave petition in this Court. They cannot claim that they have a separate period of limitation when the Department was possessed with competent persons familiar with court proceedings. In the absence of plausible and acceptable explanation, we are posing a question why the delay is to be condoned mechanically merely because the Government or a wing of the Government is a party before us.

28. Though we are conscious of the fact that in a matter of condonation of delay when there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction