Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, the Chief Officer of Municipal Council, Kinwat, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 12.06.2008 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad, rejecting the application for condonation of delay of 46 months in filing a revision petition. The revision was against a judgment dated 14.03.2002 of the Additional Collector, Nanded. The petitioner obtained a copy of the judgment in September 2002, but the last day for filing appeal was 14.06.2002. The delay was 46 months. The petitioner argued that sufficient cause was disclosed and that public interest would be affected if the delay was not condoned. The respondents opposed, stating that the delay was inordinate and no sufficient cause was shown. The court considered the submissions and the application for condonation, which stated that the delay was caused due to administrative reasons but did not provide specific details. The court found that the explanation was not sufficient and that the authority had taken a possible view. The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the rejection of the condonation application.
Headnote
A) Condonation of Delay - Sufficient Cause - Inordinate Delay - The petitioner, a Municipal Council, sought condonation of 46 months delay in filing revision against an order dated 14.03.2002. The court held that the explanation offered was not sufficient and the authority's view was possible. The petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Additional Commissioner erred in rejecting the application for condonation of delay of 46 months in filing the revision petition.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order of the Additional Commissioner rejecting the condonation of delay is upheld.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay
- sufficient cause
- length of delay not material
- explanation of delay matters
- liberal approach in condonation
- public interest
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (03) 83
WRIT PETITION NO. 2564 OF 2009
Shri P. V. Mandalik, Senior Counsel i/by Shri Amol Gandhi, Advocate for the Petitioner; Shri S. M. Vibhute, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5; Shri Vivek Bhavthankar, Advocate for the Respondent No. 7
Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded
Smt. Rabiabee Abdul Jabbar and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging rejection of condonation of delay application in revision proceedings.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought condonation of 46 months delay in filing revision petition against order dated 14.03.2002.
Filing Reason
Delay of 46 months in filing revision due to administrative reasons; petitioner claimed public interest would be affected.
Previous Decisions
Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad rejected the condonation application on 12.06.2008 in Case No. ROR/Revision/PT/127/2008.
Issues
Whether the Additional Commissioner erred in rejecting the condonation of delay application.
Whether the petitioner disclosed sufficient cause for the delay of 46 months.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that sufficient cause was disclosed and public interest would be affected if delay not condoned; relied on N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy.
Respondents argued that delay was inordinate and no sufficient cause was shown; authority took a possible view.
Ratio Decidendi
The length of delay is not material; what matters is the explanation for the delay. However, the explanation must be sufficient. In this case, the explanation was not sufficient, and the authority's view was possible. Hence, no interference.
Judgment Excerpts
The length of delay is not material. The sufficient explanation offered in the application for condonation of delay matters.
I have given due consideration to the submissions advanced by the learned senior counsel and also the respective counsel appearing for the respondents.
Procedural History
The Additional Collector, Nanded delivered judgment on 14.03.2002. The petitioner obtained copy in September 2002. The last day for appeal was 14.06.2002. The petitioner filed revision with delay of 46 months. The Additional Commissioner rejected the condonation application on 12.06.2008. The petitioner filed the present writ petition on 10.03.2011.
