Costs For 'Wastage Of Judicial Time' To Be Recovered From Officers Responsible For Delay In Filing : Supreme Court

The costs were imposed by the bench vide two different orders while hearing proceedings wherein Special Leave Petitions were preferred by the two States requesting the bench to admit the SLPs by condoning their delay.

The bench came down heavily on the counsels of both the States after observing that the SLPs were filed "without any cogent or plausible ground for condonation of delay".

The SLP was filed by the State of U.P. after a delay of 502 days whereas the delay was almost double in the case of State of Karnataka i.e. 1288 days.

"We have repeatedly discouraged State Governments and public authorities in adopting an approach that they can walk in to the Supreme Court as and when they please ignoring the period of limitation prescribed by the Statutes, as if the Limitation statute does not apply to them." the bench observed.

While considering the SLP filed by the State of U.P., Justice Kaul opined that "The Law of limitation prevents even a good case for coming up. It is not as if you can come up after hundred or thousand days."

To this, the counsel for the State of U.P. responded that this will amount to travesty of justice. However, Justice Kaul while showing strong opposition replied "It is a question of justice which is at question mark here."

Reliance was made on a 2012 judgment of Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. (2012) 3 SCC 563 wherein the Court held that the government departments have a special obligation to ensure that they perform their duties with diligence and commitment. Condonation of delay is an exception and should not be used as an anticipated benefit for government departments. The law shelters everyone under the same light and should not be swirled for the benefit of a few.

In view of this, the bench also observed that it has categorized such cases as "certificate cases" which are being filed with a sole objective of completing a mere formality and "to save the skin of the officers who may be in default in following the due process or may have done it deliberately."

"We have deprecated such practice and process and we do so again. We refuse to grant such certificates and if the Government/public authorities suffer losses, it is time when concerned officers responsible for the same, bear the consequences. The irony, emphasized by us repeatedly, is that no action is ever taken against the officers and if the Court pushes it, some mild warning is all that happens." The court ordered.

The bench therefore imposed costs of Rs. 25, 000 on both the States for wasting judicial time and ordered the amount to be deposited with the Supreme Court Employees Welfare Fund within 4 weeks. The amount was directed to be recovered from the officers responsible for causing the delay.

"Looking to the period of delay and the casual manner in which the application has been worded, we consider appropriate to imposecosts on the petitioner(s) of Rs.25,000/- for wastage of judicialtime which has its own value and the same be deposited with theSupreme Court Advocates on Record Welfare Fund within four weeks.The amount be recovered from the officers responsible for the delayin filing the Special Leave Petition and a certificate of recoveryof the said amount be also filed in this Court within the sameperiod of time", the order said.

Direction was also made to place a copy of the orders to Chief Sectaries of both the respective States for cautioning them on the point that any further non adherence of the order would result in initiation of proceedings against the Chief Secretaries.

The bench headed by Justice Kaul had been passing similar orders admonishing state governments for some time over delay in filings. Previous instances may be read here, here and here,

Case Name: State of UP & Ors. v. Sabha Narain & Ors. and Commissioner of Public Instruction & Ors. v. Shamshuddin