Suits by or Against the Government under CPC

When the Government is involved in litigation, the legal framework surrounding such proceedings is different from that governing ordinary suits. The Civil Procedure Code (CPC) outlines special procedures to ensure fairness while protecting public interests. Suits by or against the Government are governed by Section 79, Section 80, and Order XXVII of the CPC. 

These provisions aim to regulate the manner in which the Government or its officers can be sued or may sue in court. This article explains these provisions in detail, examining their scope, application, and key judicial pronouncements.

Section 79 – Who Can Sue or Be Sued?

Authority to Be Named

Section 79 of the CPC prescribes that, in suits by or against the Government, the Government should be named as the appropriate party:

• Central Government: In suits involving the Central Government, the Union of India shall be named as the plaintiff or defendant.
• State Government: In suits involving the State Government, the concerned State shall be named.

This section does not provide any cause of action but merely prescribes the mode of proceeding when a cause of action exists. Essentially, it specifies the name of the parties involved in the suit. It is important to note that Section 79 does not create a right or liability, but rather determines how the suit is framed once the cause of action arises.

Jurisdictional Aspects

Under Section 79, only courts that have jurisdiction over the place where the cause of action arises can entertain the suit. This means that jurisdiction is restricted based on where the wrongful act took place or where the defendant resides.

The words “dwell”, “reside”, or “carry on business”, which apply to private individuals, do not apply to the Government. This ensures that the Government cannot be sued based on these general provisions. In Dominion of India v. RCKC Nath & Co., it was held that such terms do not apply to Government bodies, as they are considered exceptions in this context.

Suits Against Railways

In cases where the railway administration is involved, it is not necessary to name the railway administration as a party. If the railway is administered by the Union of India or a State Government, the suit can be brought directly against the Union or State. 

For instance, in Union of India v. RC Jall, the court held that suits related to the freight charges for carrying goods could be instituted by the Union of India. This clarification allows streamlined litigation against the Government without needing to name the administrative body managing railways.

Section 80 – Pre-Suit Notice Requirement

Section 80 of the CPC is crucial because it mandates a notice to be served before a suit is filed against the Government or a public officer. This is a procedural requirement designed to give the Government or the officer a chance to reconsider its position and settle the matter before it proceeds to litigation. Section 80 lays down the specific procedure for serving such notices.

Order XXVII – Suits by or Against the Government

Order XXVII of the CPC specifically deals with suits involving the Government or public officers acting in their official capacity. This order provides detailed procedural guidelines for such suits, outlining how the Government is represented in court and the formalities required to ensure the Government’s participation in legal proceedings.

Rule 1 – Signing and Verification of Pleadings

In suits by or against the Government, the plaint or written statement must be signed by a person authorised by the Government. The person signing the document must also verify it in accordance with the rules. This ensures that the suit or response to a suit is officially sanctioned and presented by a person with proper authority.

Rule 2 – Recognised Agents

Public officers or government agents who are authorised to act on behalf of the Government in legal proceedings are deemed to be recognised agents. These agents may make appearances and file applications on behalf of the Government.

Rule 3 – Simplified Pleading

When suing or being sued, instead of inserting the personal details of the plaintiff or defendant, it is sufficient to mention the appropriate name of the Government, i.e., “Union of India” or “State of [Name]”. This simplifies the procedure and avoids unnecessary complications.

Rule 4 – Government Pleader

The Government Pleader is the designated agent for receiving legal processes against the Government. The Government Pleader does not need a stamped power of attorney, as they are authorised to represent the Government by default.

Rule 5 – Time for Communication

The court must allow sufficient time for the Government to communicate through the proper channels before fixing the date for the Government’s appearance in court. This ensures that the Government is adequately prepared to respond.

Rule 5A – Joinder of Government in Suits Against Public Officers

If a public officer is sued in their official capacity, the Government must be joined as a co-defendant in the suit. This ensures that the Government is involved in the suit and has the opportunity to protect its interests.

Rule 5B – Assistance in Settlement

The court has a duty to assist the parties in reaching a settlement in suits against the Government or public officers. This provision aims to facilitate amicable resolutions and prevent lengthy litigation, which is especially important in public law matters.

Rule 6 – Attendance of Officials

If the Government Pleader is unable to answer certain material questions in the case, the court can direct a relevant Government official to attend and provide the necessary information.

Rule 7 – Extension of Time

In cases where public officers need to refer a matter to the Government for instructions, the court can grant extensions of time to accommodate such referrals.

Rule 8 – Government Defence in Suits Against Public Officers

When the Government defends a suit against a public officer, the Government Pleader must apply to the court to formally defend the officer. The court will record the application, and the case will proceed accordingly.

Landmark Cases on Suits by or Against the Government

Several important judicial decisions have shaped the understanding and application of these provisions.

1. Jehangir v. Secretary of State (1904): This case clarified that Section 79 of the CPC is purely procedural and does not provide a cause of action. It only sets the mode for proceeding with a suit once a cause of action arises.
2. Bihari Chowdhary v. State of Bihar (1984): The Supreme Court held that the object of Section 80 is to advance justice by giving the Government or public officer an opportunity to settle the matter before litigation begins.
3. Union of India v. RC Jall: The court held that suits related to railway freight charges can be instituted by the Union of India, simplifying legal proceedings against the Government in such matters.
4. Lalchand v. Union of India: This case discussed the waiver of the notice requirement under Section 80, where the notice is merely procedural and for the benefit of the Government.

Conclusion

Suits by or against the Government are governed by a well-defined procedural framework in the Civil Procedure Code. Sections 79 and 80, along with Order XXVII, ensure that the Government is given due notice and opportunity to settle disputes before they are litigated in court. 

These provisions safeguard the interests of the Government while ensuring that citizens can seek redress through proper legal channels. Understanding these rules and their application is crucial for both legal practitioners and the public when engaging in lawsuits involving the Government or public officers.