AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Shethna, J.
(1). This group of petitions are disposed of by this common order as these petitions are arising out of the common judgment and order dated 30.5.98 passed by the Board of Revenue.
(2) The impugned common judgment and order passed by the Board of Revenue is challenged in all these petitions after a lapse of more men two years i.e. on 6.7.2000. Thus, there is a gross delay of more than two years which remained unexplained.
(3). When asked, learned counsel Mr. Khatri for the respondent State was unable to give any explanation.
(4). From the certified copy of the impugned judgment and order dated 30.5.98 (Annex.9), it appears that for the first time, the State Government woke up from the slumber and applied for certified copy of the judgment only on 13.12.99 i.e. after 19 months from the date of order and though the certified copy was ready and received by the State Government immediately on the next day i.e. on 14.12.99, the State Government decided to challenge the impugned judgment only in July, 2000. Thus, there is a further delay of almost eight months. It is unfortunate that the State Government which is armed with the legal machinery is totally negligent. Therefore, this Court has no option but to dismiss these petitions only on the count of gross delay and laches and accordingly, they are dismissed.
(5). On merits also, these petitions have no substance, therefore, on this ground also these petitions were required to be dismissed.
(6). In view of the above discussion, all these petitions fail and are hereby dismissed.
(7). Stay petitions are also dismissed.