GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Deputy Commissioner, Hyderabad and others vs Munshi MUHAMMAD EIDEN QURESHI
This matter arises from a petition filed by the Government of Sindh against Munshi Muhammad Eiden Qureshi, involving a question of limitation with a delay of sixty-six days beyond time. The core legal question concerns whether departmental delay of the Government can be treated on a higher plane than that of an ordinary litigant and whether vague explanations for such delay suffice for condonation. The Supreme Court held that delay at the departmental level stands on the same footing as delay suffered by an ordinary litigant, and ambiguous or evasive explanations lacking specific details of officer-level processing are insufficient. The Court laid down the principle that governmental bodies must provide precise, detailed justifications for delays in filing proceedings, failing which departmental negligence will not be condoned differently from that of private litigants.
- Does departmental delay of the Government stand on a higher plane than delay suffered by an ordinary litigant?
- Is an ambiguous or evasive explanation of delay at the departmental level sufficient for condonation?
- Must the Government provide specific details regarding the officer-level processing of a matter when seeking condonation of delay?
- Order XXXIII Rule 6, Supreme Court Rules 1980
ORDER
1. ' As to the question of limitation the learned Additional Advocate-General, Sindh, - has taken us through the petitioner's application under Order XXXIII, rule 6. Of the Supreme Court Rules. We, however, find that in the first place delay caused at the departmental level of the Government is placed on no higher plane than delay suffered by an ordinary litigant. What is more, even the explanation of delay at the departmental level is ambiguous if not evasive. Thus, it is not stated as to at the level of which officer(s) what period was spent in processing the matter leading, ultimately, to the filing of this petition sixty-six days beyond time. Let, therefore, a proper statement be submitted by the learned Additional Advocate- General, Sindh indicating all the relevant details.
2. Statement within a period of three weeks.
3. ' Meanwhile, the learned Additional Advocate- General, Sindh, has placed before us an order dated 27-1-1999 passed in Civil Petition No,539-K of 1998 where leave was granted in this Court concerning some of the persons who are stated to be involved also in the present petition. In such background, let notice issue to the respondent. To come up during the next session of the Court.