(a) The Commissioner of Social Services or the commissioner's designated hearing officer shall ordinarily render a final decision not later than ninety days after the date the commissioner receives a request for a fair hearing pursuant to section 17b-60, and shall render a final decision not later than three business days after the hearing if the hearing concerns a denial of or failure to provide emergency housing, provided the time for rendering a final decision shall be extended whenever the aggrieved person requests or agrees to an extension, or when the commissioner documents an administrative or other extenuating circumstance beyond the commissioner's control. Such decision shall be based upon all the evidence introduced before the commissioner or the commissioner's designated hearing officer and all pertinent provisions of law, regulations and departmental policy, and shall supersede the decision made without a hearing. Notice of such final decision shall be given to the aggrieved person by mailing such person a copy thereof not later than one business day after the decision is rendered. Such decision after hearing shall be final except as provided in subsections (c) and (d) of this section. Failure by the commissioner or the commissioner's designated hearing officer to render a final decision within the time limits set forth in this subsection shall not of itself be deemed an approval of the aggrieved person's requested relief on the merits.(b) If the commissioner or the commissioner's designated hearing officer fails to render a final decision within the time limits set forth in subsection (a) of this section, the aggrieved person may file a request for a final decision with the designated hearing officer. Such officer shall render such decision not later than twenty days after receiving such request.(c) The applicant for a fair hearing, if aggrieved, may appeal the final decision in accordance with section 4-183. Appeals from decisions of said commissioner shall be privileged cases to be heard by the court as soon after the return day as shall be practicable.(d) The commissioner may, for good cause shown by an aggrieved person, extend the time for filing an appeal to Superior Court beyond the time limitations of section 4-183, as set forth below:(1) Any aggrieved person who is authorized to appeal a decision of the commissioner, pursuant to subsection (c) of this section, but who fails to serve or file a timely appeal to the Superior Court pursuant to section 4-183, may, as provided in this subsection, petition that the commissioner, for good cause shown, extend the time for filing any such appeal. Such a petition must be filed with the commissioner in writing and contain a complete and detailed explanation of the reasons that precluded the petitioner from serving or filing an appeal within the statutory time period. Such petition must also be accompanied by all available documentary evidence that supports or corroborates the reasons advanced for the extension request. In no event shall a petition for extension be considered or approved if filed later than ninety days after the rendition of the final decision. The decision as to whether to grant an extension shall be made consistent with the provisions of subdivision (2) of this subsection and shall be final and not subject to judicial review.(2) In determining whether to grant a good cause extension, as provided for in this subsection, the commissioner, or the commissioner's authorized designee, shall, without the necessity of further hearing, review and, as necessary, verify the reasons advanced by the petition in justification of the extension request. A determination that good cause prevented the filing of a timely appeal shall be issued in writing and shall enable the petitioner to serve and file an appeal within the time provisions of section 4-183, from the date of the decision granting an extension. The circumstances that precluded the petitioner from filing a timely appeal, and which may be deemed good cause for purposes of granting an extension petition, include, but are not limited to: (A) Serious illness or incapacity of the petitioner which has been documented as materially affecting the conduct of the petitioner's personal affairs; (B) a death or serious illness in the petitioner's immediate family that has been documented as precluding the petitioner from perfecting a timely appeal;(C) incorrect or misleading information given to the petitioner by the agency, relating to the appeal time period, and shown to have been materially relied on by the petitioner as the basis for failure to file a timely appeal; (D) evidence that the petitioner did not receive notice of the agency decision; and (E) other unforeseen and unavoidable circumstances of an exceptional nature which prevented the filing of a timely appeal.Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17b-61
(1959, P.A. 96, S. 2, 3; 1963, P.A. 73, S. 1; P.A. 74-183, S. 209, 291; P.A. 75-420, S. 4, 6; P.A. 76-162; 76-436, S. 179, 681; P.A. 77-452, S. 52, 72; 77-603, S. 67, 125; P.A. 78-280, S. 25, 127; P.A. 87-473, S. 4.)
Amended by P.A. 19-0117,S. 309 of the Connecticut Acts of the 2019 Regular Session, eff. 7/1/2019. Annotations to former section 17-2b: Where objection was made to constitutionality of Sec. 17-90 on the basis of violation of due process of law, held that hearing procedure set forth in this section and Sec. 17-2a satisfies requirement of due process. 152 Conn. 56, 57. Cited. 165 Conn. 490; 168 C. 336; 172 Conn. 292. Plaintiffs, who were denied AFDC benefits while residents of Connecticut and who appealed the denial while still residents, were "aggrieved" parties, and thus could maintain the appeal notwithstanding their subsequent removal from Connecticut. 174 C. 8. Cited. 177 Conn. 599; 189 Conn. 29; 191 Conn. 384; 214 Conn. 601; 222 Conn. 69; 229 C. 664; 233 C. 370. Cited. 30 Conn.Supp. 587; 31 Conn.Supp. 515. A classification of obligations recognized in regulations concerning disposition of assets by welfare claimants is not a violation of equal protection provisions of U.S. Constitution as to those not recognized. Id., 547. Conclusions drawn from facts proved must not be the result of speculation and conjecture; does not permit reliance on hearsay when better evidence is readily available. 32 CS 560. Substantial and competent evidence requirement means such evidence that has rational probative force. Id., 564. Cited. Id., 603; Id., 605. Failure to make a finding of facts from evidence introduced at hearing constitutes an abuse of discretion. Id., 606. Cited. 33 CS 769; 34 CS 265; Id., 586; 40 Conn.Supp. 554. In an appeal taken under section, the basic issue before the court is whether commissioner has acted illegally or so arbitrarily and unreasonably as to abuse his discretion. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 271. Cited. Id., 504, 505; 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 67; Id., 85; Id., 138; Id., 338, 339; Id., 450, 647; 5 Conn. Cir. Ct. 294. On appeal from commissioner's hearing, court cannot substitute its judgment for that of commissioner; it can only decide whether action of agency was illegal, arbitrary or an abuse of discretion. Id., 505. Cited. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 353; Id., 687. Annotation to present section: Cited. 44 Conn.App. 143. Subsec. (b): An individual who applies for an administrative hearing may appeal from that decision provided that he or she also is aggrieved; Subsec. (b) does not diminish standing requirements set forth in Sec. 4-183(a) for filing administrative appeals. 176 CA 64. Department's failure to render final hearing decision within 90-day statutory deadline should have led to ruling sustaining plaintiff's appeal despite change in federal regulation stating that final decisions are "ordinarily" due within 90 days. 183 CA 392.