Principle Of Denial Of Relief On Grounds Of Laches Applicable To PIL: Bombay High Court
Sanjana Dadmi
9 Aug 2024 11:55 AM GMT
The Bombay High Court observed that the principle of denying relief on grounds of delays and laches is applicable to Public Interest Litigation (PIL). It emphasized that in the absence of an explanation for the delay from the petitioners, the court may refuse to exercise its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
In the absence of any explanation, this Court is not obligated to consider whether the petitioners' explanation is sufficient to condone the delay and laches in filing the present PIL Petition.”
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkar was considering a PIL filed by petitioners seeking cancellation of land allotted to respondent No. 5 and an inquiry into the alleged illegalities in the land allotment process. The petitioners also contended that respondent no. 5 had breached conditions of lease by mortgaging subject land to financial institution.
In 1994, the District Collector had reserved the concerned land to people belonging to SC & ST communities. In 1995, the Inspector of Land Records demarcated 110 plots for allotment to the community members. However, these plots were not handed over to them. In 1999, the State of Maharashtra allotted the land to respondent No. 5 to be used for educational purposes. The buildings were already constructed in the land before filing the PIL.
The High Court stated that petitioners seeking relief under Article 226 of Indian Constitution must satisfy the court that there are justifiable reasons for delay in approaching the court. If there is an unexplained delay, the court can refuse to exercise its discretionary power.
The Court stated that the principle of dismissing a petition due to delay or laches is also applicable to PIL. It noted that if there no reasonable explanation for delays or laches, even PILs can be dismissed.
“The principle of denial of relief on the grounds of laches is equally applicable to public interest litigation. If there is no proper explanation for the delay or laches, even public interest litigations are liable to dismissal due to unexplained delay or laches. In the absence of any explanation, this Court is not obligated to consider whether the petitioners' explanation is sufficient to condone the delay and laches in filing the present PIL Petition.”
In the present case, the Court observed that the land allotment was publicly posted on the board of the Grampanchayat before the mutation entry was certified on April 11, 2000. It noted that the petitioners approached the Court in August 2013 after an unexplained delay, putting Respondents Nos. 4 and 5 in an unfair position due to the construction of educational buildings.
It remarked “Even assuming the petitioners had a strong case on merits, intervening at this stage would now be inequitable and unjust. The petitioners are solely responsible for this delay.”
The Court thus dismissed the PIL. However, concerning the contention of petitioners that the respondent no.5 had mortgaged the land to financial institution, the Court directed the District Collector (respondent no.2) to conduct an inquiry into the matter and take any necessary actions.
Case title: Govind Kondiba Tanpure & ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors. (Public Interest Litigation No.60 of 2015)
