The Secretary To Government v. G.Ganessan @ Manogaran
CMP No. 6951 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN CMP No. 6951 of 2022 in WA.No.711 of 2015 The Secretary to Government Rural Development, Chief Secretariat, Pondicherry. and another Appellant(s) Vs G.Ganessan @ Manogaran S/o.Govindasamy, working as Technical Assistant (Daily Rated) District Rural Development Agency, Puducherry. and another Respondent(s) For Appellant(s): Mr. T.M.Naveen For Respondent(s): Mr.Prakash Adiapadam for R1
ORDER
J.NISHA BANU,J.
and M.JOTHIRAMAN,J.
This petition has been filed to clarify the order dated 01.12.2016 made in W.A.No.711 of 2015.
2. On 01.12.2016, the Division Bench of this Court has directed the appellants to pay batta to the concerned respondents on or before
23.12.2016, failing compliance, the Appeal is deemed to have been dismissed. Since the appellant had not paid batta in respect of the 2nd respondent, the appeal was deemed to have been dismissed. Now, the appellant has filed this petition to clarify the aforesaid order.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant would state that the 1st respondent is the contesting respondent and the 2nd respondent is only a formal party and they have paid batta for the 1st respondent and therefore, the Writ Appeal can be dismissed as against the 2nd respondent alone.
4. However, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent would state that only when the contempt notice was issued for disobeyance of the order passed by this Court, the petitioners/appellants have come before this Court by filing this petition to clarify. Therefore, he would pray to confirm the order dated 01.12.2016.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners/appellants, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent and perused the materials available on record.
6. On perusal of the records it is seen that at the time of admission of the appeal, stay was granted in favour of the appellants on 30.04.2015
and notice was also ordered. Instead of paying batta for both the respondents, the appellants had paid batta only for the 1st respondent. The Division Bench of this Court has directed the petitioners/appellants to pay batta to the concerned respondents on or before 23.12.2016 with a default clause that 'failing compliance, the Appeal is deemed to have been dismissed'. Since the appellant did not pay batta in respect of the 2nd respondent, the appeal was deemed to have been dismissed.
7. Even though this appeal is deemed to have been dismissed in respect of the 2nd respondent alone, taking into account the fact that the appeal is of the year 2015 and the appellants, having slept over the matter for more than six years and have filed this petition in the year 2022, that too, when the respondent has sent contempt notice for disobeyance of the order, the appeal cannot be revived to decide the same on merits as against the 1st respondent. Therefore, this clarification petition stands dismissed. Accordingly, the order dated 01.12.2016 passed in W.A.No.711 of 2017, dismissing the Appeal for default, stands.
(J.NISHA BANU J.) (M.JOTHIRAMAN J.) vsi 19-08-2025
J.NISHA BANU,J.
and M.JOTHIRAMAN,J.
vsi To 1.G.Ganessan @ Manogaran S/o.Govindasamy, Working as Technical Assistant (Daily Rated) District Rural Development Agency, Puducherry.
2.V.P.Dhanesh Technical Assistant, District Rural Development Agency, Puducherry.
CMP No. 6951 of 2022 in WA.No.711 of 2015 19.08.2025