Kishori vs D.D.C. and Another

K.N. Misra, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and perused the impugned order dated 14th March, 1981 passed by the Deputy Director Consolidation by which he has condoned the delay and remanded the case to Consolidation Officer for deciding it on merits. Whether delay should be condoned or not rests within the discretion of the authorities and it raises no question of jurisdiction unless of course it is shown that the discretion has been exercised in a manner in which it should not have been exercised at all. It has been repeatedly held by the Hon''ble Supreme Court as well as by this Court that while condoning the delay a lenient view should be taken by the consolidation authorities; see Ram Charan and Others Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation and Others, . Hon''ble Supreme Court in Dinabandhu Sahu v. Jadumoni Mangaraj AIR 1954 ISC 411 has observed that "even if the matter had to be judged u/s 5 of the Limitation Act it would have been a proper exercise of power under that Section to have excused the delay. The word ''sufficient cause'' should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when no negligence nor inaction nor want of bonafide is imputable to the Appellant." In the present case no lack of bonafide can be imputed to the opposite parties in filing revision. In my opinion the Deputy Director of Consolidation has committed no error of fact, law or jurisdiction in condoning the delay. The writ petition is devoid of merit. It is accordingly dismissed in limine. Ad-interim order of stay dated 24-6-81 is hereby vacated.