Hyper-Technical Approach Leads to Miscarriage of Justice,” Says Punjab & Haryana High Court
Justice Bansal orders fresh review of SBI employee’s case, emphasizes need for pragmatic approach to delay condonation.
In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ordered a fresh review of the punishment imposed on Suresh Kumar Bhardwaj by the State Bank of India. Justice Jagmohan Bansal’s decision underscores the necessity of a pragmatic approach over a pedantic one in delay condonation cases, citing principles of natural justice and substantial justice over technicalities.
Suresh Kumar Bhardwaj, a bank employee, was subjected to a major punishment of reduction to a lower grade of Junior Management Grade Scale-I (JMGS-I) till retirement by the Disciplinary Authority on 29.09.2020. Following this, his appeal and review were dismissed by the Appellate and Reviewing Authorities respectively, the latter citing delay as the reason. Bhardwaj, represented by Advocate Raghav Sharma, filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside these orders, arguing that his inability to file a timely review was due to his judicial custody from 01.09.2021 to 10.03.2023.
Justice Bansal emphasized that courts should not adopt a rigid, day-by-day explanation approach when dealing with delay condonation. Instead, they should consider the overall circumstances and adopt a more flexible, justice-oriented perspective. He referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Collector (LA) v. Katiji (1987), which advocates for a liberal approach to delay condonation, focusing on substantial justice rather than technical dismissals.
“The law of limitation is based on public policy and some unintentional lapse on the part of the petitioner would not be sufficient to deny condonation of delay as it would amount to a miscarriage of justice,” Justice Bansal remarked.
The court noted that the petitioner’s delay in filing the review was primarily due to his incarceration, which is a valid reason. The Reviewing Authority had agreed to condone the delay during his custody period but dismissed the review for not explaining the delay post-release. The court found this approach to be hyper-technical and contrary to the principles of justice.
Justice Bansal set aside the Reviewing Authority’s order dated 29.08.2023 and directed it to pass a fresh order on merits, ensuring that Bhardwaj receives a fair hearing. This judgment reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that procedural technicalities do not impede substantial justice, especially in cases where delays are not deliberate but due to unavoidable circumstances.
Date of Decision: 07.05.2024
Suresh Kumar Bhardwaj vs. State Bank of India and others
