SANJIB BANERJEE,J. - (1.) These appeals have been filed by the Steel Authority of India Limited after delays of more than a year and half in almost all cases. In six of the nine matters, the delay is in excess of three years and in the three other matters the delay is to the tune of 986 days, 549 days and 521 days.
(2.) The appeals are directed against awards passed under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Similar averments are contained in the several applications filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. In one of such applications, CAN 10881 of 2016 pertaining to an appeal in which the delay is of 549 days, it is alleged that the certified copy of the order "was placed before the concerned authority on June 5, 2015". The recklessness and the complete lack of responsibility with which SAIL has approached this court is evident from paragraph 10 of the condonation application where it is alleged that the application for the certified copy of the impugned award was filed on April 20, 2012 and the same was obtained on January 22, 2015, though the date of the award is November 27, 2014.
(3.) Paragraphs 11 to 15 of the condonation application are eloquently silent on the details and the approach of SAIL appears to be that the court must condone the colossal delay on its part for the mere asking. It is necessary to notice the exact averments in the relevant paragraphs, lest the sense therein gets destroyed in paraphrasing: "11. The copy of the Certified copy of the order was placed before the concerned authority on June 5, 2015. The said authority after going through the order, requisitioned some other documents including the application under Section 18 of the Act. Since the same was available in the Office of the appellant. The Learned Advocate inspite of long search could find out the copy of the said application. He then requested his clerk to apply for certified copy of such application. Immediately thereafter, the clerk of the Learned Advocate applied for certified copy of the application under Section 18 of the Act. "12. After getting the certified copy of such application, the same was submitted before the aid authority who had gone through the same very carefully. Since the other connected papers namely the copy of the Award passed by the Collector, Land Acquisition Department was before the such authority the same was collected from the State Respondents and was produced before the said authority. "13. On carefully going through the certified copy of the impugned order and the Award the appellant was of the view on appeal order required to be filed without any delay and steps to be taken immediately to file an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta. "14. That records of the entire proceedings were placed before the Learned Advocate on June 16, 2015 with an instruction to proceed immediately to file appeal. Memorandum of Appeal was prepared at once, which was thereafter settled by the Senior Advocate on June 24, 2016 and on 29th June, 2016 the appeal was filed. "15. That there was no intentional negligence or laches on the part of the appellant to file appeal and the delay in filing the appeal by 549 days was unintentional and the appellant most respectfully submit that unless such delay in preferring appeal is condoned the appellant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.";