Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years Retrospective Application of Amended Rules for Redeployment Declared Invalid: Orissa High Court NDPS Act Leaves No Room for Leniency: HC Requires Substantial Proof of Innocence for Bail Delays in processing applications for premature release cannot deprive convicts of interim relief: Karnataka High Court Grants 90-Day Parole Listing All Appeals Arising From A Common Judgment Before The Same Bench Avoids Contradictory Rulings: Full Bench of the Patna High Court. Age Claims in Borderline Cases Demand Scrutiny: Madhya Pradesh HC on Juvenile Justice Act Bishop Garden Not Available for Partition Due to Legal Quietus on Declaration Suit: Madras High Court Exclusion of Certain Heirs Alone Does Not Make a Will Suspicious: Kerala High Court Upholds Validity of Will Proof of Delivery Was Never Requested, Nor Was it a Payment Precondition: Delhi High Court Held Courier Firm Entitled to Payment Despite Non-Delivery Allegations Widowed Daughter Eligible for Compassionate Appointment under BSNL Scheme: Allahabad High Court Brutality of an Offence Does Not Dispense With Legal Proof: Supreme Court Overturns Life Imprisonment of Two Accused Marumakkathayam Law | Partition Is An Act By Which The Nature Of The Property Is Changed, Reflecting An Alteration In Ownership: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claim | Compensation Must Aim To Restore, As Far As Possible, What Has Been Irretrievably Lost: Supreme Court Awards Rs. 1.02 Crore Personal Criticism Of Judges Or Recording Findings On Their Conduct In Judgments Must Be Avoided: Supreme Court Efficiency In Arbitral Proceedings Is Integral To Effective Dispute Resolution. Courts Must Ensure That Arbitral Processes Reach Their Logical End: Supreme Court Onus Lies On The Propounder To Remove All Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding A Will To The Satisfaction Of The Court: Calcutta High Court Deeds of Gift Not Governed by Section 22-B of Registration Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Testimony Of  Injured Witness Carries A Built-In Guarantee Of Truthfulness: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempted Murder POCSO | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained Without Conclusive Proof Of Minority - Burden Lies On The Prosecution: Telangana High Court Credible Eyewitness Account, Supported By Forensic Corroboration, Creates An Unassailable Chain Of Proof That Withstands Scrutiny: Punjab and Haryana High Court Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail to Schizophrenic Mother Accused of Murdering Infant Son

Hyper-Technical Approach Leads to Miscarriage of Justice," Says Punjab & Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


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

Similar News