Government educational officers sought condonation of 178 days' delay in filing a review application, citing time taken to obtain higher authorities' approval. Finding the affidavit lacked specific dates or adequate reasons, the court declined to condone the delay and dismissed the miscellaneous petition.
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.
C.M.P.(MD).No.9475 of 2025 in Rev.Aplc(MD).SR.No.49034 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.07.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
C.M.P.(MD).No.9475 of 2025 in Rev.Aplc(MD).SR.No.49034 of 2025
1.The District Educational Officer, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.
2.The Block Educational Officer, Kalaiyrakovil, Sivagangai District.
...Petitioners
Vs.
I.Mary
...Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay of 178 days in filing the review application against the order passed in in W.A.(MD).No.86 of 2023 dated 20.11.2024.
For Petitioners : Mr.J.Ashok, Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.)
In the present petition, the petitioners seek for condonation of 178 days of
delay in filing the review application. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 3
C.M.P.(MD).No.9475 of 2025 in Rev.Aplc(MD).SR.No.49034 of 2025
2.The reason assigned, seeking for condonation of delay of 178 days in filing the review application, is that the petitioners have forwarded the case file to the higher authorities and after obtaining such permission, they had filed the review application. We are not satisfied with the said reason. The affidavit filed in support of the present miscellaneous petition also does not spell out as to when the papers were sent to the higher authorities for approval. In the absence of any specific reasons for the delay in preferring the review application, we are not inclined to condone the delay.
3.Accordingly, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed.
Sd/11/07/2025
// True Copy //
/ /2025 Sub Assistant Registrar (CS- I/ II / III / IV)
hvk
Page 2 of 3
C.M.P.(MD).No.9475 of 2025 in Rev.Aplc(MD).SR.No.49034 of 2025
C.M.P.(MD).No.9475 of 2025 in Rev.Aplc(MD).SR.No.49034 of 2025
MGJ (22.08.2025) 3 P/ 1C
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17.07.2023
Page 3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
Should the 178-day delay in filing the review application against the order in W.A.(MD).No.86 of 2023 be condoned?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The District Educational Officer, Sivagangai
The Block Educational Officer, Kalaiyrakovil
I.Mary
M.S.RAMESH
A.D.MARIA CLETE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
