Sri Venkateswara Higher Secondary School v. The Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.06.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and W.M.P.No.16468 of 2024 Sri Venkateswara Higher Secondary School, Government Aided School, Represented by its Chairman/Secretary, K.Eswarasamy Kaniyur Village, Madathukulam Taluk, Tirupur District.
....
Petitioner Vs
1. The Commissioner, Geology and Mining Operations, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
2. The District Collector,
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Udumalaipettai,
4. The Tahsildar, Madathukulam Taluk, Tirupur District.
5. N.Kadampuri ....
Respondents
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records order of the first respondent bearing Rc.No.8175/MM1/2023 dated 15.03.2024 and quash the same and remand the matter back to the first respondent and consequently direct the first respondent to consider the appeal by condoning the delay by affording sufficient opportunities and pass appropriate orders on merits within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ilamurugu For R1 to R4 : Mr.E.Vedha Bagath Singh Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed as against the order passed by the first respondent dated 15.03.2024, thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner as against the order passed by the second respondent dated 16.05.2023 on the ground of latches.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioner filed an appeal as against the order passed
by the second respondent dated 16.05.2023. On perusal of the order passed by the second respondent, it is clear that the order has been passed on 14.10.2022 and not on 16.05.2023. By calculating the limitation from 16.05.2023, the appeal was preferred on 12.06.2023 itself i.e., within a period of 30 days from the date of the order. However, in the order passed by the second respondent, they wrongly mentioned the date as 14.10.2022 and as such, the appeal was rejected on the ground of latches. However, the petitioner wrongly mentioned the date of order passed by the second respondent as 14.10.2022 and as such, once again he filed a memo and got back the appeal. Thereafter, he represented the appeal on 01.11.2023. Therefore, the Appellate Authority, viz.
, the first respondent, rejected the appeal on the ground that the appeal was not filed in time, i.e., within 30 days, as per Rule 36-C(2) of Tamil Nadu Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1959. Therefore, due to inadvertence, the petitioner wrongly mentioned the date of order passed by the second respondent and as such there was delay, while representing the appeal by correcting the date of the order.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
appeal is remanded back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. The first respondent is directed to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. 19.06.2024 Internet : Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Lpp To
1. The Commissioner, Geology and Mining Operations, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
2. The District Collector,
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Udumalaipettai,
4. The Tahsildar, Madathukulam Taluk, Tirupur District.
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
Lpp 19.06.2024