LI Network
Published on: December 20, 2023 at 15:45 IST
The Rajasthan High Court has strongly criticized the protracted delay in the proceedings of a revenue suit that has been pending for over four decades, labeling it a “typical illustration of a miscarriage of justice.”
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, presiding over a single-judge bench, issued directives to expedite the trial and urged the concerned Sub Divisional Officer to adjudicate the suit within six months, emphasizing the cessation of unnecessary adjournments.
Consequently, the High Court directed the Chief Secretary to establish an ‘Arrears Review Committee’ to assess the progress of the oldest pending revenue cases every three months.
The Chief Secretary is also required to submit a compliance report within six months, outlining the measures taken to accelerate the disposal of longstanding cases.
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand underscored the significance of revenue courts adhering strictly to the directives outlined by the Supreme Court in Yashpal Jain v. Sushila Devi & Ors 2023.
The judge urged a departure from the prevalent mindset, noting, “Time has come to change the old mindset of the litigants that cases are filed by the grandparents and the judgments are heard by their grandchildren…Time has come to change such a situation and work culture and get out of the adjournment culture.”
The suit in question was initially filed in 1981 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Rajgarh, seeking a declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants. Despite subsequent legal proceedings, including a challenge to the appointment of a ‘Receiver’ and subsequent orders, the suit has lingered for more than 40 years.
The High Court, while noting the misuse of legal processes through consistent adjournments, expressed concern that the concept of the ‘right to speedy trial’ guaranteed by Article 21 had been grossly violated.
Highlighting the ‘cancer corroding the entire body of the judicial system,’ the court condemned the adjournment culture and emphasized that no litigant should proceed with a suit according to their whims. Drawing upon precedents like Shiv Cotex v. Tirgun Auto Plast (P) Ltd. (2011) 9 SCC 678 and Noor Mohammed v. Jethanand (2013) 5 SCC 202, the court stressed the need for strict adherence to procedural norms.
In response to this, the Rajasthan High Court issued additional directions to expedite the trial of the oldest cases. Revenue courts were instructed to identify and prioritize cases pending for over 5-10 years as ‘Oldest Cases,’ and officers were required to manually record order sheets in these cases.
The Arrears Review Committee, led by Senior IAS officers, is mandated to meet quarterly to closely monitor and address issues related to the oldest cases.
The Chief Secretary is tasked with disseminating the court order to District Collectors and Revenue Officers to ensure compliance with the directives.
Case Title: Vishambhar Dayal & Ors. v. Jagannath (Now Deceased) Through Legal Heirs & Ors.