HC castigates govt for huge delay in filing appeals

Saurabh Malik

Advertisement

Chandigarh, December 1

In a major embarrassment for the Haryana Government, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has castigated it for delay in filing appeals after ignoring the provisions of the Limitation Act.

No Action For Inaction

Rarely any action is taken against erring officials/public servants for their inaction of not taking the decision well within time resulting in huge delays. This practice must be put to stop. — Justice Deepak Gupta

Making it clear that the practice was required to be brought to an end, the Bench also asserted that the erring officials most of the times got away scot-free. The assertion by Justice Deepak Gupta came on a petition filed against the State of Haryana and other respondents. The petitioner had challenged an order passed on November 5, 2019, by Narnaul Additional District Judge, allowing an application by the state and other respondents for condoning delay of 1,066 days in filing an appeal in a service matter.

Justice Gupta observed the impugned order made it evident that the defendants, to justify the plea for condonation of delay, pleaded that Narnaul Assistant District Attorney had expressed opinion that the trial court judgment was fit for filing an appeal. The file was sent for recommendation to the Legal Remembrancer. He, in turn, agreed with the opinion and directed the appellants to file the appeal.

It was further pleaded that the letter was marked to the official concerned, but he did not prepare necessary papers regarding the filing of an appeal with the District Attorney’s help. Rather, he lost the file. All this caused the delay of 1,066 days in filing the appeal. But the same was not intentional. Justice Gupta said it was noticed that the government in a large number of cases sought condonation of the delay on similar grounds. There appeared to be no change in the state government’s attitude, despite repeated directions by the HC and the apex court.

Referring to the legal position and the facts of the case, Justice Gupta said the state had been grossly negligent in filing the appeal before the first appellate court. Inaction on their part for a long time resulted in a delay of three year. Setting aside the order, Justice Gupta asserted the impugned order passed condoning the huge delay of 1,066 days, which was more than three years, could not be sustained.