TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e record or perversity warranting our interference in the writ jurisdiction. The Supreme Court in the case of Office of the Chief Post Master General v/s Living Media India Ltd [2012 (4) TMI 341 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has held that the Government bodies are required to be informed that unless they have reasonable and acceptable reasons for delay and there was bonafide effort, there is no need to accept the usual explanation that the file was kept pending for several months/years due to considerable degree of procedural redtape in the process. Delay cannot be condoned. - The Writ Petitions are devoid of merits and are dismissed. - Decided against the revenue. - Writ Petition No. 7224, 7227, 7228, 7229, 9295 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e changes and finally it was approved by the Commissioner at Daman. It is in these circumstances the applications for condonation of delay were filed. On that, the Tribunal found that the delay of 448 days is not explained properly and hence the applications seeking the condonation of delay in filing the Reference Applications were dismissed. 5. The argument is that larger public interest has suffered because of this technical view taken on applications requesting the condonation of delay. The Tribunal could have taken note of the usual events in a Government Department. The delay occurs because of the administrative difficulties and when the file is required to pass through several officers. 6. When these Petitions were placed before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsiderable degree of procedural redtape in the process. The Supreme Court held that the Government Departments are under a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. The most important observation is that condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as anticipated benefit for Government Departments. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that merely because it is the Government who seeks condonation of delay, it does not enable it to insist it on some special treatment. It is no different than other litigants. 10. It is in the light of above principles and which have been rightly applied in the given facts and circumstances that we are of the view that the impugned orders require ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
