ARKENDRA SINGH & ANR vs UOI & ORS.
$~61
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 1737/2007
ARKENDRA SINGH & ANR …..Petitioners
Through: Ms. Archana Gaur, Advocate.
versus
UOI & ORS. …..Respondents
Through:
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
ORDER (ORAL)
% 11.11.2024
CM APPL. 65715/2024(for exemption)
1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application stands disposed of.
CM APPL. 65716/2024 (Delay of 2790 days in filing review petition) and REVIEW PET. 424/2024
3. This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 2790 days in filing the review petition 424/2024.
4. We deem it appropriate to reproduce the application in its entirety:
APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE REVIEW PETITION UNDER SECTION 151 CPC R/W SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION ACT ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT
1. That the petitioner by way of the present Review Petition is seeking review of the Judgment and order dated 18.01.2017 passed by this Honble Court in WP (C ) 1737/2007 whereby the writ petition of the respondent was allowed without appreciation of material facts.
2. That the copy of the impugned order was received on 18.01.2017. After going through the impugned order it was observed that the impugned order is not in accordance with law and needs to be challenged in competent court of law otherwise flood of litigation may come before the Honble court from across the country and may lead to utter chaos.
That the said order was not acceptable on merit and letter to V & L section of CBDT was forwarded for filing the application for review of the impugned order or to challenge the order by filing SLP, however to avoid contempt, the review DPC was conducted (12.06.2018 again on 26.02.2021) but due to less number of vacancies the name of respondent could not appear. Since, then petitioners are constantly engaged in holding DPCs and meetings. Also, a Status report (dt. 06.08.2018) was submitted in compliance of the order dated 18.01.2017. However, the respondent filed contempt petition vide order dated 12.10.2021 on which he sought to withdraw but later revived and currently pending adjudication before this Honble Court.
iii. The vetting process by petitioner being a Government Department which required number of administrative steps took a considerable time which caused undue delay.
3. That the period for review expired on 18.02.2017 and thus there is a delay in filing the accompanying review petition occasioned by abovementioned facts which is sincerely regretted. Gracious indulgence of this Honble Court is hereby brought for the condonation of questioned delay.
4. That the delay of 2790 days in filing this review petition was neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the reasons stated above and the same is deeply regretted.
PRAYER
In view of the above it is most respectfully prayed that the Hon’ble High Court may be pleased to:
a. Kindly condone the delay of 2790 days in filing the review petition.
b. Pass any other order as this Honble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice.
5. We have heard Ms. Archana Gaur, learned Counsel for the review petitioner, on the aforesaid application. She submits that the petitioner was in the process of holding review DPCs, a status report had to be filed and a contempt petition had been filed by the respondents. All these resulted in delay in filing the review petition.
6. We fail to understand how holding of review DPCs can ever constitute a ground for delay in filing a review petition seeking review of a judgment passed by the Court. Insofar as the filing of the status report and the contempt petition are concerned, though these can also not constitute any justifiable basis for the inordinate delay in filing the review petition, we may note that the status report was filed on 6 August 2018 and the contempt petition was of 12 August 2021.
7. This petition has been filed towards the end of 2024.
8. Clearly, there is no justification whatsoever for entertaining a review petition filed after a delay of 2790 days. No worthwhile explanation for the delay is forthcoming.
9. Accordingly, CM APPL. 65716/2024 is dismissed.
10. The Review Petition is also dismissed on the ground of delay.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J
NOVEMBER 11, 2024/p
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
W.P.(C) 1737/2007 Page 1 of 4