Time-barred revision is not a pending proceeding unless condonation of delay is sought and considered

A time-barred revision is not a pending proceeding for the purpose of a statutory settlement scheme unless it is accompanied by a request for condonation of delay and thereby validly placed before the authority for consideration. Mere filing of a belated revision does not create legal pendency, and where no application explaining the delay is made, the proceeding cannot be treated as pending in law. The declaration under the scheme was therefore not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a revision petition filed beyond limitation, without any application for condonation of delay and without reasons for the delay, could be treated as a pending proceeding for the purpose of section 95(i)(c) of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998.

Analysis: A revision filed after the prescribed time does not become a valid pending proceeding merely because it has been presented. Where the law permits condonation of delay, pendency can arise only if the belated revision is accompanied by an application explaining the delay and placing the matter before the authority for consideration. In the absence of any such application, and even after notice no steps having been taken to seek condonation, the belated revision cannot be treated as a revision pending in the eye of law. The scheme provision requiring a pending proceeding therefore does not assist the petitioner.

Conclusion: The revision petition was not pending in law, and the declaration under the scheme was not maintainable.

Ratio Decidendi: A time-barred revision is not a pending proceeding for the purpose of a statutory scheme unless it is validly brought within the authority's consideration by a request for condonation of delay.

---