S.Saravanakumar v. The Superintending Engineer

CMP(MD)No.10449 of 2025 in WA(MD) SR.No.53539 of 2025 Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

and C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

(Order of the Court was made by Dr.ANITA SUMANTH.,J.) Mr.Sri Renganathan, learned counsel, for Mr.S.Deenadhayalan, appearing for R1 and R2 has no objection to the condonation of delay of 243 days in fling the writ appeal.

2. R3 being private party is served and the name of the counsel is printed in the cause list. However, there is no appearance on their behalf.

3. Cause list reflects that R2 has refused service. R2, who is the Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, ought not to have refused the Court notice. Specific instructions in this regard shall be obtained and an affidavit to this effect shall be filed.

4. For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, we are persuaded to condone the delay of 243 days in filing the Writ Appeal and this Miscellaneous Petition is ordered.

5. Registry is directed to number the Writ Appeal, if it is otherwise in order and list the same for admission. The names of the learned counsel who entered appearance now will continue in the cause list as and when the matter is listed.

[A.S.M.,J] [C.K.,J] sm 18.09.2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis