Chinna Sakkaiah.R v. The Secretary To Govt., / The Commissioner Of Revenue Administration

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.04.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA W.P.(MD)No.28224 of 2023 & W.M.P(MD)No.24290 of 2023 R.Chinnasakkaiah ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Secretary to Government / The Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai.

2.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur.

3.The District Revenue Officer, Karur District, Karur.

4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, 5.C.Thenmozhi Senior Revenue Inspector, Taluk Office, Aravakurichi, Karur District.

6.S.Needhirajan Special Deputy Tahsildar (Election), Taluk Office, Kulithalai.

1/6

7.T.Jeyanthi Senior Revenue Inspector, Collector Office, Karur 8.M.Sivagami Senior Revenue Inspector Revenue Divisional Office, ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from revising the seniority list of Assistants 2013 prepared by the third respondent vide proceedings in Na.Ka.A3/13691/2017 dated 05.04.2018. For Petitioner :

Mr.T.Selvan For Respondents :

Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R4 Mr.S.Saravanakumar for R5 to R8

O R D E R

Heard Mr.T.Selvan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.J.Ashok, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.S.Saravanakumar, learned counsel for the respondents 5 to 8.

2/6

2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from revising the seniority list of Assistants 2013 prepared by the third respondent vide proceedings in Na.Ka.A3/13691/2017 dated 05.04.2018.

3. Mr.T.Selvan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that even though the respondents 5 to 8 have got a right to make an appeal over the seniority list released on 05.04.2018, they ought to have invoked that right within a period of 30 days from the date of that order. However, they have preferred the appeal only in the year 2023. It is his submission that since the respondents 5 to 8 did not prefer the appeal in time, the respondent 1 to 4 shall not consider the same.

4. Just because the appeal has been filed belatedly, the petitioner cannot preclude the Authorities from hearing the appeal or from deciding about condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The petitioner has rushed to this Court without even allowing the Authorities to pass orders either on merits by condoning the delay or dismissing it due to the 3/6

delay. Since the first respondent has to take a call and pass orders on the appeal filed by the respondents 5 to 8, this petition at this stage seems to be pre-matured and it is not maintainable.

5. In view of the above stated reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

25.04.2024 NCC: Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order mbi 4/6

To 1.The Secretary to Government / The Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai.

2.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur.

3.The District Revenue Officer, Karur District, Karur.

4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, 5/6

R.N.MANJULA, J.

mbi 25.04.2024 6/6