scorecardresearch
Friday, March 29, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeJudiciary'Lethargy & incompetency' — SC imposes Rs 1 lakh cost on Centre...

‘Lethargy & incompetency’ — SC imposes Rs 1 lakh cost on Centre for delay in filing appeals

The Supreme Court said it has in the past repeatedly counselled Centre, states and public authorities to 'learn to file appeals' in time and 'set their house in order'.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Thursday imposed Rs 1 lakh cost on the central government for filing a belated appeal in a case related to parity in the pay-scale of employees at the Central Tibetan School Administration, a dispute that began 20 years ago.

An “exasperated” bench led by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul admonished the Centre for appealing against a Delhi High Court order in the case 532 days after the limitation period of 90 days to challenge the judgment expired. According to the apex court rules, an appeal against a HC verdict can be preferred in the top court within this time period.

In the case at hand, the HC order was pronounced on 19 December 2018, while the Centre moved the top court in August 2020.

‘Illiterate litigant’

The bench noted the “casual manner” in which the Centre handled the case before the HC, where it not only lost the matter for non-prosecution, but also failed to get it restored for a hearing just because the application to revive the proceedings was filed eight years after the dismissal order was given.

“Looking at the gross negligence and the impunity with which the Union of India had approached this court in a matter like this, we consider it appropriate to impose special cost of Rs one lakh in this case, to be recovered from the concerned officer(s), to be deposited with the Supreme Court advocates on Record Welfare Fund within four weeks,” the court said.

In the absence of any “cogent” or “plausible ground” to condone the delay, the bench said it showed “lethargy and incompetency” of the Union of India. Noting that the government is not an “illiterate litigant,” the bench directed placing of its order in the case before secretaries of law ministry and education ministry to make sure appeals are filed within the statutory period.

In the case at hand, a writ petition was filed in the Delhi High Court in 2000 raising a question of parity in the pay-scale of the Tibetan school employees. With a single-judge bench allowing the petition on 7 July 2002, the central government moved a bench of two judges or the division bench in appeal.

This appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution on 15 December 2008. The SC order said the Centre “decided to wake up and preferred an application seeking restoration” of its appeal in 2016, seeking condonation of a delay of 2590 days.

The Centre cited only one ground for the delay and it was that its lawyer handling the matter had been elevated as a HC judge and the department was not aware about the “peculiar circumstances.”

Dismissing the Centre’s request to condone the delay and hear it on the merits the HC had said that the Union of India cannot be compared to an illiterate litigant.

The Centre could not offer any credible explanation before the Supreme Court for the time it took to file its appeal. Calling the reasoning before the HC as “preposterous,” SC took a dig at the Centre for its lethargic approach.

“We have heard the learned Additional Solicitor General for some time and must note that the only error (in the HC order) seems to have occurred in the impugned order is of noticing that it (Centre) is not an illiterate litigant because the manner in which the government is prosecuting its appeal reflects nothing better,” the bench said.


Also read: UAPA doesn’t stop courts from granting bail when fundamental rights are violated, SC says


‘Learn to file appeals in time’

Noting that the “mighty government” is manned with a large legal department, having numerous officers and advocates, the court observed it has in the past repeatedly counselled Centre, states and public authorities to “learn to file appeals” in time and “set their house in order.”

But this, it added, appears to be falling on deaf ears, despite costs having been imposed in several matters with a direction to recover the fine amount from the officers responsible for the delay.

The present case before it, the bench said, showed that its past orders have had no “salutary effect.”

“We have repeatedly discouraged state governments and public authorities in adopting an approach that they can walk into the Supreme Court as and when they please, ignoring the period of litigation prescribed by the statutes,” the court said.

Describing such cases as “certificate cases,” filed with the only object to obtain a quietus from the Supreme Court, the bench said the objective of filing belated appeals is to complete a mere formality and save he skin of officers who may be in default in following the due process or may have deliberately chosen not to file appeals in time.


Also read: 16 names cleared by SC collegium for HC judge posts stuck with govt, 6 of them since 2019


 

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular