Madras High Court
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs E.Purushothaman on 12 September, 2024
Author: D.Krishnakumar
Bench: D.Krishnakumar
W.A.No.SR 116662 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.09.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.D.KRISHNAKUMAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
C.M.P.No.20054 of 2024
and
W.A.No. SR 116662 of 2024
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Revenue Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The District Collector,
Tiruvannamalai District.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Cheyyar,
Tiruvannamalai District. .. Petitioners/
Appellants
Vs
E.Purushothaman .. Respondent
Prayer in C.M.P.No.20054 of 2024: Petition filed to condone the delay
of 1552 days in filing the W.A.No. SR 116662 of 2024.
____________
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.SR 116662 of 2024
Prayer in W.A.No. SR 116662 of 2024: Appeal under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent against the order dated 19.12.2019 made in
W.P.No.23940 of 2010.
For the Petitioners/ : Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar
Appellants State Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)
The civil miscellaneous petition is filed to condone the delay of
1552 days in filing the writ appeal.
2. The writ appeal (SR) is filed against the order dated
19.12.2019 made in W.P.No.23940 of 2010.
3. The reason stated in the affidavit filed in support of the
miscellaneous petition seeking condonation of delay in filing is that
the petitioners were engaged in Assembly election work; annual
Jamabandi, implementation of various Schemes of Central
Government, besides implementing safety measures to contain Covid-
19 pandemic.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.SR 116662 of 2024
4. It is well-settled proposition of law that condonation of delay
is a matter of discretion of the court. What the court has to consider
is not the length of delay, but the acceptability of the explanation.
5. The Supreme Court in H. Dohil Constructions Co. (P) Ltd.
v. Nahar Exports Ltd., (2015) 1 SCC 680, held that where the
delay has occurred owing to gross negligence on the part of the
applicants and when there is no bona fide, condonation of delay
would cause prejudice to the respondents and, therefore, such
unexplained delay is not condonable.
6. On the basis of law enunciated by the Supreme Court, it is
discernible that the Court is vested with power to condone the delay,
provided sufficient cause is shown by the petitioners. It is not
necessary that the petitioners should explain every day’s delay in
literal sense. When substantial justice and technical considerations
are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice should
be given greater credence. Any course of action adopted by the Court
must serve the ends of justice. Once the Court is convinced that
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.SR 116662 of 2024
delay is properly explained and is non-deliberate, then it must
consider condoning the delay. However, if there is an unexplained
towering delay, doctrine of prejudice is attracted and warrants strict
approach.
7. In the case on hand, the only reason assigned for the delay
of 1552 is that the petitioners were engaged in Assembly election
work; annual Jamabandi; implementation of various Schemes of
Central Government, besides taking measures to ensure safety of
citizens during Covid-19 pandemic. There is no other reason assigned
for such enormous delay. The asseveration as contained in the
affidavit is only a self-serving statement and does not impel us to
consider the same as a sufficient cause for condoning such inordinate
delay. No reasons, much less valid and cogent reasons, are assigned
to condone the inordinate delay. Hence, we see no valid ground to
condone the inordinate delay in filing the writ appeal.
8. For the foregoing reasons, C.M.P.No.20054 of 2024 is
dismissed. Consequently, W.A.No.SR 116662 of 2024 is rejected.
There shall be no order as to costs.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.SR 116662 of 2024
9. We make it clear that, if there is any financial loss to the
State exchequer owing to the non-filing of the appeal within statutory
period, it is open to the State to recover such amount from the
officials concerned.
(D.K.K., ACJ.) (P.B.B, J.)
12.09.2024
Index : Yes/No
NC : Yes/No
bbr
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.SR 116662 of 2024
THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
P.B.BALAJI, J.
bbr
12.09.2024
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
