Authority: High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur
Order Date: 01.07.2026
Case Overview
- Parties: Appellant – Municipal Corporation, Raipur (through its Commissioner); Respondents – Ravindra Prakash Pujari and six other members of the Pujari family.
- Nature of Proceeding: Writ appeal (WA No. 534 of 2026) filed 324 days after the impugned order dated 17.04.2025, seeking condonation of delay under Section 2(1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006.
- Appellant’s Argument: Counsel Bhuvenshwar Singh Rajput contended the delay was due to bona‑fide administrative procedures—examination of the judgment, collection of records, obtaining legal opinion, and securing approvals—and asserted no prejudice to respondents.
- Judicial Reasoning: The Court referred to Supreme Court judgments (Postmaster General v. Living Media, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ramkumar Choudhary, Union of India v. Jahangir Byramji Jeejeebhoy) emphasizing that “sufficient cause” must be shown and that governmental bodies cannot rely on routine bureaucratic processes as a blanket excuse.
- Finding on Delay: The Court held the appellant’s explanation was generic, lacking specific circumstances that prevented filing within the limitation period, and therefore did not satisfy the requirement of sufficient cause.
Final Outcome
- The application for condonation of delay was rejected.
- The writ appeal was dismissed on the grounds of delay and laches, without any examination of the substantive merits.
- The Court directed the State to streamline legal machinery, assign responsibility to the officer(s) causing the delay, and penalize them for any revenue loss incurred.
Topics: Condensation of Delay, Judicial Procedure