THE STATE OF BIHAR vs M/S DAYANAND PRD. SINGH AND COMP. — SLP(C) No.(Verified On 27-2-2019)

Case under Section XVI. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010194732018

Filing Date

16-May-2018

Registration No

SLP(C) No.(Verified On 27-2-2019)

Diary Number

19473/2018

Order Date

01-May-2023

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed on ground of delay

Last updated 14-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section XVI

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR

    Adv. NIRANJANA SINGH (Dead / Retired / Elevated)

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.M/S DAYANAND PRD. SINGH AND COMP.

    Adv. MAYANK PANDEY[caveat]

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 01-May-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 01-May-2023

    Not Taken Up

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra

  4. 13-Apr-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 13-Apr-2023

    After Week/Month/Vacation

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra

  6. 20-Mar-2023

    Administrative Order

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra

  7. 02-Aug-2022

    Fixed Date by Court

    Registrar (J-VI)

  8. 04-May-2022

    Fixed Date by Court

    Registrar (J-VI)

  9. 22-Mar-2022

    Fixed Date by Court

    Registrar (J-VI)

  10. 29-Jan-2020

    Fixed Date by Court

    Registrar (J) - II

  11. 26-Nov-2019

    Fixed Date by Court

    Registrar (J) - II

  12. 11-Sep-2019

    Ordinary

    Registrar (J) - II

  13. 08-Jul-2019

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 08-Jul-2019

    After Week/Month/Vacation

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.A. Bobde and Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai

  15. 05-Mar-2019

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 05-Mar-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  17. 16-May-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. SLP(C) No.(Verified On 27-2-2019)

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State of Bihar v. M/S Dayanand Prd. Singh and Comp. The Supreme Court dismissed the State of Bihar's Special Leave Petitions challenging the High Court's rejection of its revision application against an Arbitral Tribunal Award. The High Court had rejected the State's revision as time-barred—filed over two years after the Award when the 90-day limitation period had expired. The State argued the delay was due to its lawyer's failure to inform it of the Award, but the Court rejected this explanation, holding that departmental authorities must remain vigilant in arbitral proceedings and cannot escape responsibility through blame on counsel. Additionally, the Supreme Court itself found the petitions were filed 90-441 days beyond the permitted time limit. The petitions were dismissed on both grounds of delay and merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts District Courts
Search Another Case