The District Collector v. R.Madhavan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05.03.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

1. The District Collector Office of Collector Chengalpet, Chengalpet District.

2. The District Revenue Officer Office of District Revenue Officer Chengalpet, Chengalpet District.

3. The Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) IT Expressway Scheme Tambaram - 600 045 Chengalpet District.

4. The Revenue Divisional Officer Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer Tambaram 600 045, Chengalpet District.

5. The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) IT Expressway Scheme Tambaram - 600 045 Chengalpet District.

..

Appellants

Vs.

R.Madhavan ..

Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 13.12.2023 made in W.P.No.32334 of 2023. For the Appellants : Mr.R.Ramanlaal Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate For the Respondent : Ms.K.Shunmugapriya

JUDGMENT

(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Heard Mr.R.Ramanlaal, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate for the appellants and Ms.K.Shunmugapriya, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The appeal is filed only against the order directing payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) each from the

salary of the present appellants.

3. It appears that subsequently, the writ petition filed by the original writ petitioner has been allowed.

4. It is contended by learned Additional Advocate General that the matter came up before the Court on 15.11.2023 for the first time and time was sought. The matter was adjourned to 13.12.2023. Only because time was sought on the said date, Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) cost was imposed on each of the appellants. There is no wilful or inordinate delay on the part of the appellants.

5. Learned counsel for the original writ petitioner submits that the original writ petitioner does not seriously dispute the request of the appellants to waive the cost.

6. It is submitted by learned Additional Advocate General that

the original officers were transferred. The officers are new and that they could not get the entire records and as such, the affidavit could not be filed.

7. Considering the reasons given, the direction imposing cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) on each of the appellants is set aside. The writ appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.395 of 2024 is closed. (S.V.G., CJ.) (D.B.C., J.) 05.03.2024 Index : Yes/No kpl

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

(kpl) 05.03.2024