The Court condoned the delay in filing a revision petition under Article 226 and directed the Revisional Authority to entertain and decide it on merits after providing an opportunity of hearing.
Directed the first respondent to entertain the revision filed by the petitioner and decide the same on merits after affording an opportunity of being heard.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 06.05.2021 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P.No.11660 of 2021
K.S.Thiyagarajan
... Petitioner
Vs
Thanjavur District. .... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to condone the delay in filing revision petition and directing the first respondent to number the revision petition returned by him on 01.04.2021 in N.Dis.No.27452/2021 and fix the date for hearing after giving opportunity to the petitioner within a stipulated time.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghupathi For Respondents : Mr.T.M.Pappiah Special Government Pleader
The prayer sought for herein is for a writ of mandamus, to condone the delay in filing revision petition and directing the first respondent to number the revision petition returned by him on 01.04.2021 in N.Dis.No.27452/2021 and fix the date for hearing after giving an opportunity to the petitioner, within a stipulated time.
days, therefore, there is a delay in filing the revision.
"Considering the same, I do not find any discrepancy in the order impugned. However, in the interest of justice, to decide the matter on merits, rather than rejecting it technicalities and render the petitioner remediless, in the exercise of powers under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court condones the delay of 24 days in filing the appeals and direct the respondent to entertain the appeals and decide the same on merits, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
authority, namely, the Commissioner, HR & CE, this Court is of the considered view and also of the respectful agreement with the view expressed by the learned Judge in the order cited above, dated 25.11.2019, that the delay in preferring revision can very well be condoned. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ petition, with the following order :
That the first respondent is hereby directed to entertain the revision filed by the petitioner and decide the same on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned as early as possible.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
(Vacation Officer)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mvs/tsvn
To
1. The Commissioner
Hindu Religious and Endowment Department
Nungambakkam
Chennai 600 034.
2. The Joint Commissioner of HR & CE
Thanjavur Region
Thanjavur.
3. The Executive Officer
Arulmighu Viswanata Swamy Thiru Kovil
Pattukkottai Town and Taluk,
Thanjavur District.
+cc to Govt Pleader,Sr.27163
+cc to Mr.V.Raghupathi Advocate,Sr.27162
W.P.No.11660 of 2021
RR(CO) baf 17/05/2021
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can condone the delay in filing a revision petition under Article 226 when no express statutory power exists for the revisional authority.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.S. Thiyagarajan
The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Endowment Department
The Joint Commissioner of HR & CE Thanjavur Region
The Executive Officer Arulmighu Viswanata Swamy Thiru Kovil Pattukkottai Town and Taluk
R. Suresh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
