Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

8. In Madras Port Trust v. Hymanshu International, (1979) 4 SCC 176 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held: (SCC p. 177, para 2):

"2. .... It is high time that governments and public authorities adopt the practice of not relying upon technical pleas for the purpose of defeating legitimate claims of citizens and do what is fair and just to the citizens. Of course, if a government or a public authority takes up a technical plea, the Court has to decide it and if the plea is well founded, it has to be upheld by the court, but what we feel is that such a plea should not ordinarily be taken up by a government or a public authority, unless of course the claim is not well- founded and by reason of delay in filing it, the evidence for the purpose of resisting such a claim has become unavailable...."

without protest or where the State Government would otherwise be irretrievably be prejudiced, take up a technical plea to defeat the legitimate and just claim of the citizen."

10. Unwarranted litigation by governments and statutory authorities basically stem from the two general baseless assumptions by their officers. They are:

(i) All claims against the government/statutory authorities should be viewed as illegal and should be resisted and fought up to the highest court of the land.

14. Similar reiteration of law can be found in a fairly recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajendra Shankar Shukla and others vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others (2015) 10 SCC 400, wherein again while referring to the earlier decision in Hymanshu's case (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held in para 32 as under:

"32. Further, this Court has frowned upon the practice of the Government to raise technical pleas to defeat the rights of the citizens in Madras Port Trust vs. Hymanshu International (1979) 4 SCC 176, wherein it was opined that it is about time that governments and public authorities adopt the practice of not relying upon technical pleas for the purpose of defeating legitimate claims of citizens and do what is fair and just to the citizens. Para 2 from the said case reads thus :- (SCC p.177) .
"2. We do not think that this is a fit case where we should proceed to determine whether the claim of the respondent was barred by Section 110 of the Madras Port Trust Act (2 of 1905). The plea of limitation based on this section is one which the court always looks upon with disfavour and it is unfortunate that a public authority like the Port Trust should, in all morality and justice, take up such a plea to defeat a just claim of the citizen. It is high time that governments and public authorities adopt the practice of not relying upon technical pleas for the purpose of defeating legitimate claims of citizens and do what is fair and just to the citizens. Of course, if a government or a public authority takes up a technical plea, the Court has to decide it and if the plea is well-founded, it has to be upheld by the court, but what we feel is that such a plea should not ordinarily be taken up by a government or a public authority, unless of course the claim is not well-founded and by reason of delay in filing it, the evidence for the. purpose of resisting such a claim has become unavailable. Here, it js obvious that the claim of the respondent was a just claim supported as it was by the recommendation of the Assistant Collector of Customs and hence in the exercise of our discretion under Article 136 of the Constitution, we do not see any reason why we should proceed to hear this appeal and adjudicate upon the plea of the appellant based on Section 110 of the Madras Port Trust Act (2 of 1905)."