A 41-year delay in PTCL resumption proceedings renders the resumption order unsustainable.

The petitioners challenged the Deputy Commissioner’s order dated 23 April 2024 directing resumption of the subject land under the PTCL Act.

The land had been granted in 1949 and sold in 1966; resumption proceedings were initiated in 2007.

The Assistant Commissioner had rejected the claim, but the Deputy Commissioner set aside that decision on appeal.

The petitioners sought certiorari to quash the Deputy Commissioner’s order.

The Court applied the principle that delay and laches are relevant to proceedings for restoration or resumption of granted land under the PTCL Act, and that significant delay may bar such proceedings.

It referred to a Division Bench’s clarification that laches should be treated as a primary consideration in land-resumption cases.

The Court noted that the land was sold in 1966, while resumption proceedings began only in 2007, approximately 41 years later.

The Deputy Commissioner set aside the Assistant Commissioner’s rejection without addressing whether the delay was unreasonable or considering that rights in the land had been settled by the sale deed.

Because delay and laches were crucial to the resumption decision, the failure to consider them rendered the Deputy Commissioner’s order legally unsustainable.

It directed the authority concerned to restore the petitioners’ name in the revenue records relating to the subject land.