RFA No. 3855 of 2011(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 3855 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision : 27.07.2011 Union of India and another ....Appellants Versus Ajit Singh and another ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1. Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgment ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? *** Present: Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. * * * RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J (ORAL) Union of India has filed this appeal challenging the impugned award dated 8.9.2007 passed in LAC Case No.1598 of 17.4.2001 determining the compensation of land in favour of the respondent-land owners. This appeal was initially filed by the appellant on 27th December, 2007. This appeal was preferred without obtaining the certified copy of the impugned award. Thus, office of the High Court after giving benefit of 90 days of limitation period to the appellant raised an objection that the appeal was time barred by 15 days. The office further raised objections and returned the appeal on 7 February, 2008 to the counsel for the appellant for removing those objections. The objections raised by the registry reads as follows:- 1. How appeal within a limitation RFA No. 3855 of 2011(O&M) 2 2. Opening sheet should be page marked. 3. Paper book should be page marked. 4. Caveat note should be mentioned on the Index. 5. Fair typed copy of main judgment should be filed. Photocopy of main judgment is not permissible in photo paper. 6. Index should be completed. 7. Provision of law should be correctly mentioned in the exemption C.M. 8. Date of notification u/s 4 is not mentioned in the main judgment. Copy of notification u/s 4 should be filed. 9. Affidavit in support of both C.M.should be filed. 10.Paper book should be filed in Bond Papers. 11.Stay C.M. mentioned in Index is not forthcoming. 12.Date of decision should be corrected in the grounds of appeal. 13.Name of Ld. Judge should be corrected in around of appeal. 14.Any other case to be refiled within a week. Thereafter, this appeal was re-filed on 7 November, 2009. However, the same was returned again by raising the following objections on 9th November, 2009. Thereafter again the appellant kept quite and re-filed the appeal only on 15th July, 2011 by removing all the objections. It is pertinent to mention that the application for condonation of delay of 15 days as calculated by the office on 7th February, 2008 has been filed for the first time only on 15th July, 2011 when this appeal has been re-filed. The aforesaid application for condonation of 15 days delay is dated 5.7.2011 and is also supported by an affidavit of Sh. S. K. Sardana, Defence Estate Officer, Pathankot Circle, Pathankot, dated 5thJuly, 2011. The appellant has also filed an application for condoning the delay of 1243 days in re-filing this appeal by making averments which reads thus:- That there is a delay of 1243 days in the re-filing the appeal. The delay in re-filing the appeal has been caused as the certified copy of the judgment passed by Ld. Trial Court was not readily available with the appellants. RFA No. 3855 of 2011(O&M) 3 That the present appeal has been filed against the award delivered Ld. Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur on 08.9.2007. After obtaining the legal opinion of the counsel in the Trial Court and thereafter opinion from Legal Advisor (Defence) through proper channel, the office of Defence Estate Office obtained the necessary sanction from the office of the Principal Director, Defence Estate, Ministry of Defence, Western Command, Sector 9, Chandigarh and engaged Rajiv Sharma, Advocate/Senior Panel Advocate to file the appeal against the impugned order/award dated 08.09.2007. That due to non releasing of the miscellaneous amount for obtaining the certified copies of the judgment by the Principal Controller, Defence Accounts, Western Command, Sector 9, Chandigarh, the certified copies of the judgment in the pressent case and other similar cases could not be applied and obtained from the copying agencies at the District Court, Gurdaspur. The office of the Principal Director, Defence Estate, Ministry of Defence, Western Command, Sector 9, Chandigarh accorded approval for release of amount of Rs.32,000/- for obtaining the certified copies of the award passed by Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur in 160 cases (i.e. In the pressent case as well as other similar cases) in favour of Principal Controller of Defence Accounts Western Command, Chandigarh. However, the office of the Principal Controller, Defence Accounts, Western Command, Sector 9, Chandigarh released the aforementioned amount of Rs. 32000/- at the disposal of DEO, Pathankot on 1.9.2011. The amount as such was received by the office of Defence Estate Office, Pathankot on 03.09.2011 and the amount was given to the counsel at Trial Court for obtaining the certified copies of the judgments. Because of the non releasing of the amount by the office of Principal Controller, Defence Accounts, Western Command, Sector 9, Chandgairh, the certified copies could not be applied and obtained from the copying agency at Gurdaspur and the same could not be supplied to the counsel earlier. That the certified copy of the award was applied and thereafter the present appeal is being re-filed. That the delay in filing/re-filing the appeal in the present case has occurred due to non release of the miscellaneous amount by the office of the Principal Controller, Defence Accounts, Western Command,Sector 9,Chandigarh and it is because of these reasons, the certified copies could not be obtained in time for filing/re-filing of appeal against the impugned order/award of Ld. ADJ, Gurdaspur. RFA No. 3855 of 2011(O&M) 4 That it may be mentioned here that already number of land-owners (whose land has been acquired by the same notification, but decided by the Ld. Trial Court separately) have filed appeals in respect of their order and the same have been admitted and are yet to be listed for final hearing. The details of some of the appeals are being given below:- Sr. No. LAC No. RFA No. Name of Party 1 1627/01 669/08 Karam Chand etc. 2 1632/01 670/08 Dhannu Ram 3 1657/01 671/08 Bishan Dass 4 1631/01 672/08 Atma Ram 5 1635/01 673/08 Karnail Singh 6 1620/01 674/08 Rup Lal etc. 7 1656/01 675/08 Raj Kumari etc. 8 1642/ 763/08 Prem Chand As stated above the appeals against the orders, arising out of the same notification have been filed by the land-owners and the same have been admitted. Since the impugned order in question arise out of the same notification, so the present appeal may kindly be entertained and the main appeal may be heard and decided on merits in the interest of justice. Interestingly, these averments have been also made in the application for condonation of 15 days delay, in filing this appeal. A perusal of the averments made in this application which is supported by an affidavit of the Defence Estate Officer of the appellant would show that the delay in filing as well as re-filing the appeal has occurred due to non-release of the miscellaneous amount for obtaining the certified copies of the judgment by the Principal Controller, Defence Accounts, Western Command, Sector 9, Chandigarh and because of this reason only the certified copies could not be obtained in time for filing appeals against the impugned order/award of the trial Court dated 8.9.2007. A perusal of the certified copy placed on the record would show that the said certified copy was applied on 4 October, 2010 and the same was ready for delivery on 15 October, 2010 and was actually delivered on 20th October, 2010. Inspite of that the appeal has been re-filed only on 15 November, 2011 that is after a RFA No. 3855 of 2011(O&M) 5 delay of more than one year for which no explanation is forthcoming. Not only this a perusal of the appointment letter of the learned counsel which is available on the record shows that he was authorized to file these appeals vide order dated 4 November, 2007. In the aforesaid authorization, it has been mentioned that his fee and miscellaneous expenses @ 500 per case has already been sought from the department. If that is so it cannot be accepted that the re-filing of the appeal was withheld because of the non release of the miscellaneous expenses. It was for the department to file the appeal complete in all respects as per procedure prescribed by this court and inspite of the fact that the defects in filling the appeal were pointed out to the appellants as back as on 8th November 2008, the appellant-department has taken 3 years and 9 months to re-file the appeal. The application is completely silent about dates of the release of the amounts as mentioned in para 4 of the application. Not only this it has been mention in para 4 that an amount of Rs 32000/- for obtaining the certified copy of the impugned award in 160 cases was released in favour of the Principal Controller, Defence Accounts, Western Command, Sector 9, Chandigarh and the Estate Office released the aforementioned amount at the disposal of DEO, Pathankot on 1-09-2011 and the said amount was received by Estate Officer on 03-09-2011 and the said amount was given to the counsel at the trial court for obtaining the copy of the judgment. Due to non release of the miscellaneous expenses for obtaining the certified copy of the judgment was not obtained by the counsel at Gurdaspur. At this stage learned counsel for the appellant has submitted before this court that the dates as given in the present para are of the year of 2011 is in fact 2010 and not 2011. RFA No. 3855 of 2011(O&M) 6 From the aforesaid averments made in this para, it is clear that conduct of the estate officer in pursuing these appeals is totally deplorable. The department has not acted with due diligence and in fact have allowed the time to lapse because of their inaction inspite of the fact that amount was sought in the year 2007 for pursuing these appeals but the same was released only after a lapse of more than 3 years. The lapse on the part of officers of the appellant cannot be ignored in any manner. Even there after it has not come on record as to when the certified copies were handed over to the learned counsel for re-filing etc, but it appears from the record that the same have been supplied to him only in July, 2011 as apparent from the affidavits of the Defence Estate Officer were sworn on 5th July 2011 . In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court finds no merit in this application for condonation of delay in filing/re-filing and the prayer made on the behalf of the applicants is rejected. Since the application for condonation of delay in filing/re-filing these appeals has been rejected, the appeal is also dismissed as time bared. The other civil miscellaneous application filed along with this appeal do not survive. The Government of India in the Department of Ministry of Defence, New Delhi through its Secretary is directed to fix the responsibilities of the officers who were negligent in filing this appeal and it is further directed that after fixing the responsibility this court be informed regarding the action taken on such a report. 27.7.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) savita Judge RFA No. 3855 of 2011(O&M) 7