Ahmedabad: The Gujarat High Court has sent out a clear message:
the government must follow the same rules as everyone else.
In this case, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) tried to challenge a court order that awarded compensation to farmers whose land was taken near the Dholavira World Heritage site in Kutch. But ASI filed its appeal almost two years late after a delay of 718 days.
The Court refused to excuse this delay. It said that government departments cannot expect special treatment just because they are government bodies. Laws about deadlines exist to protect people, especially ordinary citizens like farmers, and the state cannot ignore them casually.
The judges emphasized that when the government deals with people’s land, money, and livelihoods, it has a greater duty to act carefully and on time, not less.
The Court stood with fairness and accountability, making it clear that the government is not above the law and must respect citizens’ rights just like any private party.
What Actually Happened
1. Land was taken, but farmers weren’t paid fairly
Around 2004–05, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) took about 100 acres of land near Dholavira to protect the heritage site and promote tourism.
The problem? The farmers were offered an extremely low compensation so low that it worked out to less than ₹1 per square metre in some cases.
The farmers challenged this in court and kept fighting for years.
Finally, in July 2023, a court in Bhachau (Kutch) decided that the farmers deserved higher compensation about ₹9.57 per square metre for nine landowners.
2. Court ordered payment, but ASI kept delaying
After the 2023 order, the farmers asked the court to force ASI to pay (this is called execution).
The case moved to a court in Rajkot, where the judge sent notices to ASI.
Each time, ASI officials told the court:
“We’ll deposit the money soon.”
But instead of paying, they kept asking for more time, again and again.
3. ASI tried a late legal escape
Rather than paying the farmers, ASI suddenly filed an appeal against the 2023 order almost two years late (718 days to be exact).
They also asked the High Court to excuse the delay, saying:
- files had to move through departments,
- approvals were needed from New Delhi,
- government procedures take time.
4. The High Court was not impressed
In January 2026, the Gujarat High Court flatly rejected ASI’s excuse.
The judge said, in effect:
- Government bodies don’t get special treatment just because they are the government.
- “Paperwork and approvals” are not a valid excuse for ignoring court orders.
- ASI had promised the lower court it would pay, then hid this fact while filing the appeal.
- The appeal looked like a deliberate attempt to delay payment, not a genuine legal challenge.
The Court concluded that:
- ASI dragged its feet for years,
- misled the execution court, and
- filed a very late appeal only to avoid paying farmers what they were legally owed.
So the High Court refused to help ASI and shut the door on further delay.
Bench Remarks and Legal Rationale
The Court made one thing very clear: no one gets special treatment just because they are the government. Asking the court to forgive a delay is not a right it’s a privilege, and it has to be properly justified. The same legal deadlines apply to the State as they do to ordinary citizens. This keeps the system fair and prevents misuse of power.
Justice M. K. Thakker pointed out that the reasons given for the delay were not convincing at all. In fact, the Court felt that the delay showed carelessness and an intentional attempt to stall the execution of the order, rather than a genuine difficulty.
Quoting the Judgment:
“…Considering the grounds urged in support of the application, this Court finds that they are not only insufficient but wholly inadequate and indicative of a negligent and mala fide intent to delay execution proceedings…” Justice M. K. Thakker
The Court also firmly rejected the excuse that government files take time to move, or that approvals have to pass through multiple officers. The message was simple: internal bureaucracy is not the court’s problem. If deadlines are ignored because of slow decision-making within a department, the government must bear the consequences just like any private party would.
In short, the ruling reinforces a basic rule of justice: the law’s clock ticks the same for everyone.
Penalty and Directions
The Court fined the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) ₹1 lakh. It also made it clear that this money should not just be paid by the department as a whole, but recovered from the individual officer or officers who were actually responsible for hiding information or being negligent.
This means the Court is holding specific officials personally accountable, not letting the mistake be brushed off as a routine government lapse.
The Court also directed that the money collected should be deposited with the court handling the case, and after proper verification, the amount should be given to the farmers who were originally affected.
Broader Legal Background
Law of Limitation and Government Bodies
The law sets time limits for filing cases and appeals so that disputes are resolved fairly and without endless delay. Missing these deadlines is supposed to be an exception, not the norm.
Government departments are not above these rules. Courts have made it clear that the government cannot assume it will automatically be forgiven for delays just because files move slowly or approvals take time. Even High Courts in states like Chhattisgarh have said that limitation periods are mandatory, not optional, and government bodies cannot treat them as flexible or ignore them at convenience.
Supreme Court’s Position
The Supreme Court has consistently said that if someone including the government files a case late, they must give a real, convincing reason. Saying “this is how the system works” or blaming internal procedures is not enough.
This is especially important when delays harm ordinary citizens. In cases involving things like fair compensation or property rights, the Court has stressed that bureaucratic inefficiency cannot be allowed to override people’s fundamental rights. In short, the government’s delay should not become the citizen’s punishment.
Voices from the Courtroom
For ASI: Advocate Ankit Shah, speaking for the Archaeological Survey of India, explained that the delay happened because the matter had to go through internal permissions and approvals.
For the Farmers: The farmers’ lawyer said that ASI had repeatedly promised to make the payment but never actually did so. The lawyer also argued that ASI hid important facts in its request to excuse the delay, which amounts to misleading the court.
Court’s Note: The court recorded the assistance of Himani Shah, Assistant Government Pleader, and Jignesh Kumar M. Nayak, Advocate, who appeared and argued against ASI.
Timeline of Events
- 2004–05: The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) took land near Dholavira from local farmers.
- July 2023: After a long court fight, a district court ordered ASI to pay compensation to nine farmers at the rate of ₹9.57 per square metre.
- 2023–2025: The farmers started legal steps to recover the money. ASI kept telling the court it would pay, but kept delaying.
- November 2025: Nearly two years later (about 718 days), ASI finally filed an appeal, along with a request asking the court to excuse the delay.
- January 2026: The Gujarat High Court refused to excuse the delay, rejected ASI’s appeal, and penalised ASI with costs for wasting time.
The court made it clear that government authorities cannot delay payments endlessly and then expect courts to be lenient. Farmers who waited for years were entitled to timely justice
Implications and Policy Significance
For Government and Public Bodies
This judgment makes it clear that government departments can’t hide behind red tape, delays, or internal hierarchy. They are expected to follow court deadlines just like any ordinary citizen. Saying “the file was stuck” or “approval was pending” is not an excuse anymore.
For Land Acquisition and Compensation Cases
Land cases often drag on for years, and farmers or landowners are made to wait endlessly for their compensation. This decision shows that courts are serious about stopping such delays and making sure people especially vulnerable farmers get what they are legally owed, on time.
For the Judicial Process and Public Trust
By penalising delays and holding officers personally responsible, the Court sends a strong signal: justice cannot be stalled on purpose. This helps restore public faith in the legal system and reassures people that courts will step in when bureaucracy tries to slow down or avoid justice.
Conclusion
The Gujarat High Court has sent a clear message: the law applies equally to everyone, even to government bodies connected with heritage or culture. The Court refused to excuse the government’s delay in approaching it and made officials pay a cost for their negligence.
By doing this, the Court stood up for ordinary citizens who often suffer because of slow and careless government actions, especially in land acquisition cases that drag on for years. The order shows that bureaucratic excuses will no longer be accepted at the cost of people’s rights, and that fairness and timely justice matter more than status or symbolism.
ALSO READ | IATA World Legal Symposium 2026: Global Aviation Liability Enters a New Phase
