The Chief Engineer (Personnel) v. R.Selvaraj

C.M.P.Nos.3595,3545,3537,3634,3641,3633,3787,3644 and 3637 of 2021 in W.A.Sr.Nos.15161 to 15169 of 2021 M.M.SUNDRESH, J., and S.KANNAMMAL, J., [Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.] Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. Learned counsel appearing the petitioners submitted that the delay has occasioned in view of the subsequent order passed by the learned single Judge on a oral mentioning, clarifying the earlier order passed. The earlier order has been complied with. There was lack of communication and the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners was not in possession of the relevant records as the earlier order was passed in the year 2009 and the subsequent clarifying order was passed in the year 2018.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the delay being huge, the same need not be condoned.

4. Considering the aforesaid submission, we are inclined to condone the delay. As stated, the subsequent order was passed on a oral mentioning and the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners represented that he was holding the vakalat at the relevant point of time. There appears to be huge gap of nine years https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

M.M.SUNDRESH, J., and S.KANNAMMAL, J., mmi between the first order and the second order. According to the petitioners, they have complied with the first order, which has attained finality. Therefore, this appeal itself is against the subsequent clarificatory order passed.

5. In view of the above, the delay in filing the appeals is condoned and these petitions are allowed.

6. Registry is directed to print the name of Mr.S.N.Ravichandran as the counsel for the respondent while listing the appeals for admission. (M.M.S., J.) (S.K., J.) 11.08.2021 mmi/ssm C.M.P.Nos.3595,3545,3537,3634, 3641,3633,3787,3644 and 3637 of 2021 in W.A.Sr.Nos.15161 to 15169 of 2021 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/