Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

conferred. In this context, "in good faith" means "for legitimate reasons". It must be exercised bona fide for the purpose and for none other. (Refer: Noida entrepreneurs Association vs. Noida & ors., (2011) 6 SCC 508).

22 To say the least, respondent-Department, which is 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and is a public institution has conducted itself of untrustworthiness out of its own mouth by resorting to litigation like a cantankerous litigants by raising technical plea despite knowing fully-well that its decision was wrong.

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...."

9. In a three Judge Bench judgment of Bhag Singh & Ors. v. Union Territory of Chandigarh through LAC, .

Chandigarh [(1985) 3 SCC 737]: the Hon'ble Supreme Court held: (SCC p. 741, para 3) "3... The State Government must do what is fair and just to the citizen and should not, as far as possible, except in cases where tax or revenue is received or recovered 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."

that it was its primary responsibility to protect the rights of citizens, and to respect their fundamental rights and in the process it should become "responsible litigant". The policy even defines the expression 'responsible litigant' as under:

Responsible litigant" means-

(i) That litigation will not be resorted to for the sake of litigating.

(ii) That false pleas and technical points will not be taken and shall be discouraged.