The Court acceded to the prayer for condonation of delay in filing a review application, allowing WMP No.6355 of 2020 without costs, as the learned counsels had no serious contest regarding the concession.
Prayer for condonation of delay in filing review application allowed; no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
WMP No.6355 of 2020 in Review Application SR No.22227 of 2020
WMP No.6355 of 2020
in
Review Application SR No.22227 of 2020
M.SUNDAR.J.,
Mr.G.Surya Narayanan, learned counsel on record for petitioner in
captioned WMP, Mr.M.Elumalai, learned Additional Government Pleader on
behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.K.S.Ramasamy, learned Central
Government Standing Counsel on behalf of fourth respondent, are before me in
this Web hearing on a video conferencing platform.
prayer to condone the delay of 88 days in filing aforementioned Review
Application, seeking review of order dated 28.08.2019 in WMP No.25450 of 2019. The reason for delay has been articulated in paragraph-2 of the affidavit
filed in support of captioned WMP. As both aforementioned counsel do not
have any serious contest regarding the prayer for condonation of delay, it may
not be necessary to delve in detail into the reasons set out in paragraph-2 of the
affidavit filed in support of captioned WMP.
1/2
WMP No.6355 of 2020 in Review Application SR No.22227 of 2020
M.SUNDAR, J.
Svn
WMP, having heard aforementioned learned counsel on both sides, is satisfied
that it is acceding to the prayer for condonation of delay would be reasonable.
Accordingly, WMP No.6355 of 2020 stands allowed. No costs.
12-10-2020
Svn
WMP No.6355 of 2020
in
Review Application SR No.22227 of 2020
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay in filing the review application should be condoned.
Petitioner
Respondent 1
Respondent 2
Respondent 3
Fourth Respondent
M. Sundar J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
