The Chairaman v. K.E.Ramakanthan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.09.2020 CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr.A.P.SAHI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY C.M.P.No.6786 of 2020 and W.A.No.SR 22938 of 2020 THE CHAIRAMAN TAMIL NADU SLUM CLEARANCE BOARD, NO.5, KAMARAJAR SALAI, CHENNAI-600 005.
.. Petitioner/ Appellant -vs1 K.E.RAMAKANTHAN 2 J. BHUVANESWRAN 3 P.T.JACOB 4 P.S.MUTHUKRISHNAN 5 J. MOHANAN 6 P.N.SUBRAMANIAM 7 R. PONNAIAH 8 S. SATANATHA VALAL 9 M. RAMADOSS 10 SARASWATHI 11 BENJAMIN GONZAGA 12 M. KUPPUSAMY 13 T. SURIYANARAYAMOORTHY 14 V. ANJANEYALU 15 Y. EDWARD 16 A.G.BALATHANDAYUDAM
17 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FORT ST GEORGE CHENNAI-600 009.
.. Respondents CMP.6786 of 2020 filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to Condone the delay of 3247 days in filing the above Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent as against the impugned order of the Learned Judge dated 30.03.2011 made in WP.No.22157 of 2010. For Petitioner/Appellant : Mrs.D.Latha
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice) We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner / appellant. 2.The appeal had been presented after a considerable delay that came to be recorded by us in our order dated 19.08.2020, which is extracted hereinunder:- "We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, who seeks an adjournment.
2.There is a huge delay of 3247 days. From the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation petition, we find no
plausible explanation, much less sufficient cause so as to condone the delay. The explanation afforded, therefore, does not persuade us to accept the reasons given in the affidavit to condone the delay. Reasons have to be explained and cause has to be sufficiently shown, as explained by the Apex Court in the case of Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649. The explanation not forthcoming, we do not find this to be a fit case to condone the delay.
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for one indulgence to assist the Court further.
List on 9.9.2020. "
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant has not been able to place any material before us either in the shape of an affidavit or otherwise so as to demonstrate that this inordinate delay of 3247 days could be possibly condoned keeping in view the law laid down by this Court as referred to hereinabove.
We, therefore, in the absence of any such valid explanation forthcoming, do not find this to be an appeal worth entertaining on account of heavy laches.
The delay condonation petition is, accordingly, dismissed and the appeal is consigned to records.
(A.P.S., CJ.) (S.K.R., J.) 09.09.2020 Index : Yes/No sra To 1.THE CHAIRAMAN TAMIL NADU SLUM CLEARANCE BOARD, NO.5, KAMARAJAR SALAI, CHENNAI-600 005.
2.THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FORT ST GEORGE CHENNAI-600 009.
The Hon'ble Chief Justice and Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.
(sra) C.M.P.No.6786 of 2020 and W.A.No.SR 22938 of 2020 09.09.2020