T.Balasubramanian Vs The Executive Engineer /

To condone the delay of 852 days in filing the above Review Petition against the order passed in W.P.(MD).No. 14095 of 2018 dated 27.02.2020 and thus render justice.

¶12

PRAYER in Review Petition (MD) No. SR 30618 of 2024:

¶13

To review the order made in W.P.(MD).No. 14095 of 2018 dated 27.02.2020.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.P Krishnasamy,

¶15

For Respondent : Mr.M.Suresh Standing Counsel

¶16

1/4

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

WMP(MD). No.11632 of 2024

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The application is filed to condone the delay of 852 days in filing the review application.

¶21

The writ petition has been filed with a prayer to grant compensation to the tune of Rs.3,48,940/- being the loss incurred by the petitioner and the expenses incurred on account of the prolonged delay in resolving the issue relating to the grant of patta and the execution of the sale deed with reference to the plot allotted to him by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Trichy Housing Unit. Since the matter was dragged on, for 14 years, by the said housing board without proper reasons, the petitioner filed W.P.(MD)No.14095 of 2018. On 27.02.2020, the petitioner withdrew the said writ petition. While withdrawing the writ petition, no leave was prayed for with reference to file a second writ petition on the same cause of action. However, subsequently the petitioner filed a second writ petition on the same cause of action in W.P(MD)No.14386 of 2020. By order dated, 13.12.2022 finding that the earlier writ petition seeking the same relief had already been filed and dismissed as withdrawn, and that the petitioner had not reserved any liberty to

¶22

2/4

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

WMP(MD). No.11632 of 2024

¶25

file a fresh writ petition, the second writ petition came to be dismissed. As against the dismissal of the second writ petition, the petitioner filed W.A(MD)No.861 of 2023, which also came to be dismissed by an order dated 20.06.2023. Thereafter, in view of the fact that no liberty had been granted in the first writ petition, the petitioner filed Review Petition (MD)No.20 of 2024. After considering the earlier proceedings, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, while disposing of the review petition, granted liberty to the petitioner to move a review before the learned Single Judge, where the error is pleaded to have occurred on the date of withdrawal. Accordingly, the present review petition has been filed with a delay of 852 days.

¶26

Considering the fact that all the above proceedings were pending and having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the delay is condoned and this petition is allowed.

¶27