| COURT: | Supreme Court |
| CORAM: | K. M. Joseph J, Sanjay Kishan Kaul J |
| SECTION(S): | 5 of Limitation Act |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | Condonation of delay |
| COUNSEL: | Kushagra Pandey |
| DATE: | January 17, 2020 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | February 8, 2020 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | - |
| FILE: | Click here to download the file in pdf format |
| CITATION: | |
| Condonation of delay: There are large gaps which are unexplained. It is not known whether any action was taken against the officers who are responsible for the inordinate delay. The highest Court cannot be a walk in place to file any time irrespective of period of limitation prescribed. To blame it on the inefficiency of the administration is no more good excuse. Administration directed to hold an inquiry into the aspect as to who is responsible for such inordinate delay and take suitable action against the officers concerned (Post Master General vs. Living Media (2012) 3 SCC 563 referred) | |
ITEM NO.3 COURT NO.12 SECTION XVI-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 3097/2018
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-10-2016
in LPAOW No. 178/2002 passed by the High Court of J & K at Jammu)
ADMINISTRATOR, JAMMU MUNICIPALITY & ANR. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
M/S SWARN THEATRE & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.185067/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY
IN FILING and IA No.185068/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING)
Date : 17-01-2020 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Kushagra Pandey,Adv.
Mr. Mujahid Karim Khan,Adv.
Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajesh Mahna,Adv.
Mr. Bhargava V. Desai, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The special leave petition has been filed after a delay of 387 days with further delay of 302 days in refiling. This is one more case which we have defined as “Certificate Cases” – the object being only to obtain dismissal from the Supreme Court. We have perused the application for condonation of delay also. There are large gaps which are unexplained and there are no instructions with the counsel whether any action was taken against the officers who are responsible for the inordinate delay.
The highest Court of the land cannot be a walk in place, more so for State Governments to file any time irrespective of period of limitation prescribed. To blame it on the inefficiency of the administration is no more a good excuse in view of the judgment in the case of Post Master General & Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. reported in (2012) 3 SCC 563.
We thus dismiss the applications for condonation of delay in filing and refiling and direct the State administration to hold an inquiry into the aspect as to who is responsible for such inordinate delay and take suitable action against the officers concerned.
The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed. The compliance report be filed within six weeks and the Registrar to ensure that the same is taken on record.
(ANITA MALHOTRA) (ANITA RANI AHUJA)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
Recent Comments