Team Goemkarponn
PANAJI: The Bombay High Court at Goa has dismissed the Goa government’s request to condone a 714-day delay in filing an appeal against an order enhancing compensation for acquired land, ruling that routine administrative processes cannot justify such prolonged inaction.
A Division Bench of Justice Neela Gokhale and Justice Amit Jamsandeckar observed that the State had failed to provide any convincing explanation for the delay and could not expect special consideration merely because the matter involved government departments.
The dispute relates to land acquired for the construction of the Mestabhat–Talpone road in Shiroda.
Court records show that the Land Acquisition Officer had fixed compensation at ₹25 and ₹80 per square metre in 2012. However, the District Judge at Ponda, in an order passed on October 16, 2023, revised the compensation to ₹675 per square metre.
Instead of filing an appeal within the prescribed period, the State approached the High Court only on January 7, 2026, leading to a delay of 714 days.
While examining the State’s explanation, the Bench found that the file remained pending at multiple levels of the government. It stayed in the office of the Executive Engineer for 99 days, remained in the Chief Minister’s Office for 239 days, and later spent 71 days with the PWD Minister before eventually reaching the Advocate General’s office for legal action.
The judges noted that the explanation primarily described the movement of the file between departments and labelled the entire period as an “administrative delay,” without establishing any exceptional circumstances that prevented timely filing.
Referring to settled legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court, the Bench held that government departments are expected to follow limitation laws like any other litigant and cannot rely on internal procedures to seek condonation of long delays.
The court concluded that the State had failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay and that allowing the appeal would unfairly postpone payment of the enhanced compensation due to the affected landowners.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the application seeking condonation of delay, effectively preventing the State from pursuing its delayed appeal against the compensation awarded by the District Court.
