K.Petchiappan v. Union Of India, Rep. By

W.M.P.No.33263 of 2019 in Rev.Aplw SR.No.42276 of 2017 W.M.P.No.33263 of 2019 in Rev.Aplw SR.No.42276 of 2017 M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J., and R.HEMALATHA, J., [Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.] Heard the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also Mr.V.Vijaya Shankar, learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4, who strongly opposes this petition for the reason that the delay is more than one year.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has invited the attention of this Court to the paragraph nos.2 to 4 and would submit that in the light of the reasons assigned, the delay in representation cannot be construed as neither willful nor wanton and prays for condonation of delay.

3. This Court has considered the rival submissions and a perusal of the paragraph nos.2 to 4 would disclose that the petitioner has assigned property, sufficient and tenable reasons for the delay in representation of papers and in the considered opinion of this Court, it deserves acceptance. http://www.judis.nic.in 1/2

W.M.P.No.33263 of 2019 in Rev.Aplw SR.No.42276 of 2017 M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.

AND R.HEMALATHA, J.

sk

4. In the result, the Miscellaneous Petition is ordered and the delay of 587 days in representation, is condoned. If the papers are otherwise in order, Registry is directed to number the Writ Miscellaneous Petition in W.M.P.SR.No.42276 of 2017 and list it for hearing and print the name of Mr.V.Vijay Shankar for writ petitioner / respondents 2 to 4. [M.S.N,J] [R.H,J] 03.01.2020 sk W.M.P.No.33263 of 2019 in Rev.Aplw SR.No.42276 of 2017 http://www.judis.nic.in 2/2