Review application against dismissal of a writ appeal concerning condonation of delay in restoring a dismissed writ petition over non-selection as police constable. With no representation for the applicant on repeated listings, the Court dismissed the review application for non-prosecution.
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.
Rev.Appl.No.124 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.08.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
and
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP
Review Application No.124 of 2021 in W.A.No.3375 of 2019
M.Mohamed Yacob
.. Petitioner
Vs
.. Respondents
Prayer : Review Application under Order 47, Rule 1 read with Section 114 of CPC to review the order dated 1.2.2021 passed in W.A.No.3375 of 2021.
Page 1 of 6
Rev.Appl.No.124 of 2021
For the Petitioner : No appearance For the Respondents : Mr.P.Balathandayutham Spl. Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J. )
There is no representation for the review applicant when the matter is called out.
(i) The review applicant applied to the post of Police Constable
_____________ Page 2 of 6_
Rev.Appl.No.124 of 2021
on 30.5.1985 and he has not been selected on the ground of involvement in a criminal case. Challenging the non-selection, the review applicant filed W.P.No.27657 of 2006. The said writ petition came to be dismissed for non-prosecution on 24.7.2008. Thereafter, the review applicant has filed a petition for restoration of the writ petition along with an application in M.P.No.1 of 2015 seeking condonation of delay of 2027 days in filing the restoration petition.
(ii) By the order dated 4.3.2016, the petition filed to condone the delay was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. Aggrieved by the same, the review applicant filed a writ appeal, being W.A.No.3375 of 2019. The Division Bench of this Court, after taking note of the fact that the delay of 2027 days occurred only due to the mistake of the review applicant in not following-up the matter diligently, dismissed the writ appeal vide judgment dated 1.2.2021. Even though the review applicant offered an explanation that the name of the counsel on record was printed and the name of the review applicant was not printed in the cause-list, the Division Bench specifically observed that, that cannot be the reason to condone the inordinate delay of 2027 days in filing the petition for restoration of
_____________ Page 3 of 6_
Rev.Appl.No.124 of 2021
the writ petition.
Page 4 of 6
Rev.Appl.No.124 of 2021
today. As stated supra, today, there is no representation on behalf of
the review applicant. The attitude of learned counsel for the review applicant warrants condemnation.
any further indulgence to the review applicant. The review application is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
(S.S.S.R., J.) (S.S.K., J.) 28.08.2024
Index : Yes/No NC : Yes/No bbr
To:
_____________ Page 5 of 6_
Rev.Appl.No.124 of 2021
Madras-9.
S.S.SUNDAR, J. AND SATHI KUMAR SUKUMARA KURUP, J.
bbr
Review Application No.124 of 2021
28.08.2024
_____________ Page 6 of 6_
2 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Mohamed Yacob
The Deputy Commissioner of Police (Admn.), Office of the Director General of Police
The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police
Tamil Nadu Government Department, by its Secretary, Home Department
S.S.Sundar
Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
