Jharkhand HC again pulls up State, rejects delayed appeals over administrative lethargy
Ranchi, June 17: The Jharkhand High Court has once again taken a stern view of administrative delays by the state government, refusing…
Ranchi, June 17: The Jharkhand High Court has once again taken a stern view of administrative delays by the state government, refusing to condone delays of 495 days and 356 days in two separate appeals and observing that routine bureaucratic procedures cannot be used as an excuse for prolonged inaction.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar dismissed the state government’s applications seeking condonation of delay, holding that no sufficient cause had been shown to justify the extraordinary delay in approaching the court.
High Court Criticises Government’s Casual Approach
The court noted that the explanations offered by the government largely revolved around the movement of files between departments, obtaining legal opinions and administrative approvals.
In one case, involving a 495-day delay, the Bench found that the government had allowed the matter to remain dormant for several months despite being fully aware of the order it intended to challenge. The judges observed that substantial periods of delay remained completely unexplained.
In the second case, concerning a 356-day delay, the court found similar lapses and held that administrative inertia and a lack of diligence could not constitute sufficient grounds for condonation.
‘State Cannot Claim Special Treatment’
Relying on a series of Supreme Court judgments, the High Court reiterated that government departments cannot seek special treatment under limitation laws merely because decisions involve multiple layers of approvals and file processing.
The Bench observed that limitation laws apply equally to the State and private litigants and that delays caused by bureaucratic functioning cannot be condoned mechanically.
Strong Observations on Administrative Lethargy
Quoting recent Supreme Court rulings, the High Court emphasised that courts should not become “surrogates for State laxity and lethargy” and cautioned against reopening settled matters after inordinate delays.
The judges underlined that procedural timelines are rooted in public policy and are intended to ensure finality in litigation. They also noted that unnecessary delays place an unfair burden on ordinary litigants who are often compelled to continue legal battles against the vast machinery of the State.
Appeals Dismissed
Finding no satisfactory explanation in either matter, the Bench dismissed both applications seeking condonation of delay. Consequently, the appeals filed by the State government were also disposed of.
The ruling is significant as the High Court has on several occasions in recent years expressed concern over delays, non-compliance and a lack of urgency on the part of government departments in pursuing litigation and implementing court orders.
