C J BHATT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant - petitioner has challenged in this appeal judgment and order dated 23.02.2001 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court dismissing his special civil application no. 2263 of 1990 on the ground of delay as well as on merits.

(2.) Learned counsel Shri Nanavaty for the appellant petitioner vehemently submitted that the learned single Judge committed grave error in dismissing this petition on the ground of delay at the final hearing stage. He submitted that once the petition was admitted by another learned single Judge and posted for final disposal, then it ought not to have been dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. In support of this submission, Mr.Nanavaty has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of (1) Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and another V/s Dolly Das reported in (1999) 4 SCC 450, (2) Rameshchandra R Patel V/s Collector, Kheda reported in XX GLR page 191 and (3) Kumbhar Yakub Jusab V/s Bhuj Municipality and Others reported in 1991(2) GLR 755.

(3.) We may first deal with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited's (supra). In that case, for the first time plea of delay was taken up before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and on peculiar facts of that case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that such a plea of delay cannot be allowed to be raised for the first time before the Supreme Court as it was never raised before the High Court. We fail to appreciate that how this judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court will be applicable on facts of this case. In Rameshchandra's case (supra), the Division Bench of this Court was dealing with the petition challenging the municipal elections and on facts of that case, the Division Bench of this court held that municipal election is not a matter of individual concerned or momentary importance but of vital public interest, therefore, on peculiar facts of that case, the Division Bench of this court held that once the petition was admitted without objecting as to delay then it should not be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. That is not the case here. Hence, the said judgment would not be applicable on facts of this case. In Kumbhar Yakub Jusab's case (supra), the learned single Judge following the Division Bench of this court in case of Rameshchandra (supra), reiterated the principle laid down by the Division Bench and held that where an important question of law was involved and the writ petition was already admitted then it would not be proper for the court at a later stage to dismiss the petition on the ground of delay and laches. Thus, this judgment of the learned single Judge will also not be helpful to the appellant - petitioner on facts of this case.