Govt can’t justify appeal delays citing bureaucracy: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court ruled that government departments cannot seek condonation of delay in arbitration appeals by citing bureaucratic procedures or file movement. Dismissing the Railways' appeal, it said the government and private litigants stand on equal footing under limitation law

Lucknow: The Allahabad High Court has ruled that government departments cannot seek condonation of delay in filing appeals under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act merely by citing bureaucratic procedures, movement of files or administrative delays.

The court held that the government and private litigants stand on an equal footing under the law of limitation. The judgment, reserved on July 13, was delivered on July 29 and uploaded on Thursday. It came while dismissing a special appeal filed by the Ministry of Railways against an order of the Commercial Court, Lucknow.

---

A Lucknow division bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Abhadesh Kumar Chaudhary upheld the Commercial Court’s refusal to condone a delay of 28 days in filing objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The dispute arose between M/s Gallant Ispat Limited and the Ministry of Railways over the lease rent of land allotted for a railway siding. In December 2023, a sole arbitrator ruled in favour of the company, directing the Railways to revise the lease rent and refund about Rs 1.79 crore along with eight per cent interest.

The Railways challenged the arbitral award before the Commercial Court, but its petition was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. The court rejected its plea for condonation of delay, prompting the ministry to approach the high court.

Senior advocate Gaurav Mehrotra, appearing for Gallant Ispat Limited, argued that the Railways had failed to furnish any sufficient explanation for the delay and, therefore, was not entitled to the relief sought.

Dismissing the appeal, the high court observed that the Supreme Court has consistently held that condonation of delay is “an exception and not a rule”. It said government departments must establish genuine, sufficient and bona fide reasons for delay and cannot seek indulgence merely on the ground of administrative lapses, procedural delays or movement of files between offices.