Can't Condone Lethargic Attitude Of Petitioner Who 'Slept Over' His Rights: Rajasthan HC Declines Plea To Get Land 52 Yrs After Auction

Deprecating the practice of seeking relief through writ petitions after the lapse of several years without satisfactory explanation, the Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a plea regarding the deposit of the balance amount for an auction that occurred 52 years ago.

The single-judge bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand iterated that courts have usually discouraged entertaining writ petitions barred by delay and laches. In this case, 1/4^th of the auction amount was deposited by the petitioner under an auction conducted by respondent authorities in 1972. After the lapse of 18 years, when he tried to deposit the balance amount via a demand draft in 1990, the respondents refused to accept the same citing Rajasthan Municipalities (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules 1974.

“The petitioner participated in the auction process in the year 1972, then slept for 18 years and woke up in the year 1990 and prepared a demand draft for depositing the balance amount. However, the amount offered by the petitioner was not accepted by the respondents.. again the petitioner slept for 29 years and has woke up now by way of filing this petition for not giving any good plausible explanation of total 52 years delay in raising his voice to get the auctioned land”, the court underscored.

The bench sitting at Jaipur also opined that a mere representation submitted by the petitioner after the rejection of the demand draft cannot possibly explain the delay that has occurred in approaching the court for relief.

“…The petitioner was sitting over the matter and he has not challenged the action and non-action of the respondents before the Competent Court for redressal of his grievances except the steps taken by him by way of filing a representation. Mere filing of representation would not condone the lethargic attitude of the petitioner…”, the single judge bench felt that the petitioner was 'sleeping over' his right for nearly three decades since the refusal to accept the balance deposit.

When the petitioner initially raised objections regarding the applicability of Rajasthan Municipalities (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules 1974 to the auction proceedings, Bundi Municipal Council's Chairman wrote a letter to the Director of Local Self Government seeking appropriate directions. The matter has been pending ever since that letter dated 21.08.1995.

The court extensively discussed a catena of judgments about the detrimental effect of unexplainable delays and laches on a litigant's case. Some of these decisions include Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board & Ors. v. T.T. Murali Babu, (2014) and Union of India & Ors. v. N.Murugesan & Ors. , (2022).

After referring to these judgments, Justice Dhand noted that the law has set its face against indolent litigants approaching the court after a long delay.

“The Courts have consistently observed that delay and laches on part of the litigant will disentitle him to any relief. In this regard the Hon'ble Supreme Court has settled the law with clarity and observed it with consistency”, the single judge bench clarified before dismissing the writ petition on the ground of delay and latches.

Advocate Naman Yadav appeared for the petitioner staking the claim over auctioned land.

Case Title: Rajendra Gupta v. State of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Urban Development and Housing & Ors.

Case No: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2797/2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 42

Click Here To Read/ Download Order