Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. Mr. Pal has then urged that since an application for vacation may not be disposed of within the time specified in Article 226(3) for no fault of the Writ Petitioner in whose favour the order was made and may not be so disposed of due to inadvertence of the office of the Court in listing the application or due to the Court itself being pre-occupied with other matters or otherwise, the period specified or the provision providing for its automatic vacation on the expiry of the period specified must be held to be directory. It is true that actus curiae nemmem gravabit and it is almost settled law that where a statute prescribes a period within which a Court or Tribunal or any other public functionary is to dispose of a matter or discharge a function, over which the parties to be affected thereby would have no control, the period so prescribed is not to be taken as that mandatory as to vitiate the disposal of the matter or discharge of that function beyond that period. Section 17(2)(a) of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 provides that "the Court shall" make an order "within a period not exceeding one year", but any challenge to an order solely on the ground of its being made beyond one year cannot but fail on the principle that a party may have no control over the functions of the Court.