Resumption of granted land is unsustainable when authorities fail to consider prolonged delay and laches.

The subject land had been granted to the original grantee in 1957–58 and was sold under a registered sale deed in 1984.

Resumption proceedings were initiated in 2003–04, nearly 19 years after the sale.

The Assistant Commissioner ordered resumption on 16 December 2008, and the Deputy Commissioner affirmed that order on 22 June 2017.

The petitioner sought certiorari to quash both orders, contending, among other grounds, that the proceedings were initiated after an unreasonable delay.

The Court applied the principle that delay and laches are material considerations in proceedings to resume or restore granted land, and that authorities must consider whether such proceedings should be entertained when initiated after a significant delay.

It referred to a Division Bench’s clarification that laches should be treated as a primary consideration and that restoration action brought after substantial delay may be barred by laches.

The land had been sold in 1984, but resumption proceedings began only in 2003–04.

The Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner ordered resumption without addressing either the length of the delay or the petitioner’s claim that it was unreasonable.

Because delay and laches were relevant to whether the proceedings should proceed, the authorities’ failure to consider them rendered their orders unsustainable.

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