Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

Explanation Given For Seeking Condonation of Huge Delay of 1,633 Days Cannot Be Accepted – Supreme Court on State’s Inefficiency

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India has dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the State of U.P., citing the state’s failure to provide a valid justification for a delay of 1,633 days in challenging a High Court order.

The judgment revolved around the question of whether the condonation of a substantial delay in filing an SLP could be permitted based on the reasons provided by the state government.

The SLP aimed to overturn a decision from November 13, 2009, by the High Court. However, the petition was not filed until years later, in 2014. The state attributed the delay to administrative hurdles and legal misadvice, asserting that these factors impeded the timely filing of the petition.

Condonation of Delay: The justices criticized the state’s management of its legal affairs, noting that the presence of the state in the High Court hearings negated any claims of ignorance about the order. Justice Ravikumar highlighted, “The explanation given for seeking condonation of huge delay…cannot be accepted,” indicating that bureaucratic delays and mismanagement are unacceptable excuses.

Misrepresentation of Facts: The judgment also pointed out inaccuracies in the state’s representation of related legal precedents, which misled the court about the status of similar cases. This misrepresentation diminished the credibility of the state’s application for delay condonation.

Decision Concluding its findings, the Supreme Court dismissed the condonation of delay application, along with the SLP itself, firmly stating that inefficiencies and errors on the state’s part do not constitute “sufficient cause” under the law.

Date of Decision: May 3, 2024

State of U.P. & Another vs. Mohan Lal

Similar News