The Supreme Court of India has set aside a Jharkhand High Court order that had dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) as time-barred due to a 221-day delay in filing. A Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria condoned the delay, emphasising that “substantial justice cannot be sacrificed at the cost of public good,” but directed the State to pay ₹1,00,000 to the writ applicant as a condition for restoration of the appeal.
Background of the Case
The State of Jharkhand had challenged the High Court’s order dated 28 October 2024 in I.A. No. 9029/2024 in LPA (Filing) No. 6893/2024, where the High Court had refused to condone the 221-day delay in filing the intra-court appeal. The High Court had found that the appellants had adopted a “very lethargic attitude” and exhibited negligence, leading to dismissal of the appeal.
Arguments and Legal Principles
The appellants sought condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The Supreme Court reiterated that the expression “sufficient cause” must be given a liberal interpretation, citing its earlier decision in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors., AIR 1987 SC 1353, which stressed that when substantial justice and technical considerations are at odds, the cause of justice should prevail.
The Court observed:
“Irrespective of the length of delay, if the cause shown is sufficient, the delay deserves to be condoned. When substantial justice is pitted against technicalities, necessarily such technicalities will have to kneel down before the substantial justice.”
It also relied on State of Nagaland v. Lipok Ao & Ors., (2005) 3 SCC 752, reiterating that when refusal to condone delay results in miscarriage of justice, courts should lean towards condonation.
Court’s Analysis
The State had explained the delay by stating that officials were engaged in the Special Summary Revision 2024 and the “Sarkar Aapke Dwaar” programme. The Bench acknowledged that the explanation was “casual,” but held that the State, being an impersonal machinery, often moves slowly due to bureaucratic procedures, and no personal benefit accrues to the officials in delaying matters.
The Court stated:
“Even when there is bureaucratic lethargy, the substantial justice cannot be sacrificed at the cost of public good.”
Decision
The Supreme Court condoned the 221-day delay, set aside the High Court’s order dated 28.10.2024, and restored the appeal to the file of the High Court for adjudication on merits. However, it imposed a cost of ₹1,00,000 on the State, to be paid to the writ applicant within eight weeks. The Bench clarified that the State would be at liberty to recover the amount from officers responsible for the delay.
The Court also made it clear that no opinion was expressed on the merits of the appeal, which will now be heard by the High Court after giving both parties reasonable opportunity of hearing.
