Gujarat High Court cancels the Revenue Tribunal’s decision that allowed a 22-year delay, stating that while the state doesn’t need to justify daily delays, there must be a valid reason for the long wait.
The Gujarat High Court canceled an order from the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal that allowed a delay of about 22 years and 8 months. The court noted that while the State, as an impersonal entity, does not need to justify every day of delay, there must still be reasonable grounds for accepting such a long delay. The Petitioner contested the decision made by the in-charge Chairman of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, which had condoned the significant delay in challenging an order from the Deputy Collector. Justice Nikhil S. Kariel, in a Single-Judge Bench, remarked that the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal did not provide sufficient reasons for allowing a delay of over 22 years.
Advocate Vishvesh R. Acharya represented the Petitioners, while Assistant Government Pleader J K Shah represented the Respondents. The case involved a decision made on August 30, 1996, by the Deputy Collector, which changed the land’s status from restricted to unrestricted for agricultural use. The State challenged this decision before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal by filing a Revision Application, along with a request to condone the delay. The Tribunal approved this request. The Bench emphasized that while the State does not need to justify every day of delay, there must be some reasonable justification for such a lengthy delay.
The Bench noted that vague and unclear observations indicate that when the Government divides districts for public purposes, it can lead to complicated situations. As a result, issues like the current one may go unnoticed by government officials. Therefore, the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal found a valid reason for allowing a delay of over 22 years. The Bench stated that given the long delay, the State needed to provide a strong reason for this delay, which the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal should consider according to the law set by the Supreme Court and this Court.
The Bench pointed out that the reasons given by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal were not enough to justify such a delay. However, since the order was being challenged for being almost a non-speaking order, the State should be given a chance to present its case for condoning the delay. The Gujarat Revenue Tribunal was instructed to review this case within a specific timeframe. The Bench canceled the previous order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal and directed it to reopen the revision application along with the delay condonation request.
Cause Title: Legal Heirs of Deceased Jamalsha Ibramsha Rafai & Ors. v. Gujarat Revenue Tribunal & Ors. [Case No.-R/Special Civil Application No. 11749 of 2024]
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocate Vishvesh R. Acharya
Respondents: Assistant Government Pleader J K Shah
