Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 228 (MAD)

State of Tamil Nadu v. Hindu Middle School

2016-01-21

P.DEVADASS, SATISH K.AGNIHOTRI

body2016
ORDER : P. Devadass, J. The Official respondents in WP No.5519 of 2005 seek condonation of delay of 726 days caused in preferring the Writ Appeal as against the order of the Writ Court dated 23.7.2012. 2. The learned Government Advocate, referred to the reasons stated in the affidavit filed by the second petitioner, submitted that the delay occurred is not willful and an opportunity may be given to the Government. 3. The respondent/writ petitioner filed counter opposing the prayer of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner submitted that no satisfactory and acceptable reasons have been stated to condone the enormous delay and the motive of this petition is just to delay the matter further. 4. We have anxiously considered the rival submissions, perused affidavits filed by the parties and the materials on record. 5. The respondent -School in Mavadi in Tirunelveli District is in existence for very many years. It is being run as a Minority School. Its status has been affirmed on 23.11.1983 by a declaratory decree passed by the IX Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai in O.S.No.4189 of 1977. The Department also accepted it. After the demise of its Founder, his son run the Management of this School. Thereafter, there was change in the Management. The Headmaster and the daughter of the School Manager objected to this. In the circumstances, the Educational Authorities refused to continue the minority status already accorded to this school by their letters dated 5.8.2004 and 8.9.2004. The School filed writ petition in WP No.5519 of 2005 for a Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the said letters. 6. The Writ Court coming to the conclusion that the School has satisfied the requirements for a Minority Institution prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.270 dated 17.6.1998, allowed the writ petition and also directed the Education Department to recognise its minority character taking into account the Civil Court decree passed in O.S.No.4189 of 1977. 7. The Writ Court passed the said order as early as on 23.7.2012. Even as per the averments in the affidavit filed by the second petitioner, the order copy was received on 17.9.2012. The legal opinion was given by the Special Government Pleader on 4.7.2013 and the subsequent opinion was received on 12.3.2014. However, the writ appeal was filed only on 6.8.2014. 8. There is enormous delay. Even as per the averments in the affidavit filed by the second petitioner, the order copy was received on 17.9.2012. The legal opinion was given by the Special Government Pleader on 4.7.2013 and the subsequent opinion was received on 12.3.2014. However, the writ appeal was filed only on 6.8.2014. 8. There is enormous delay. It is stated in the affidavit filed by the petitioner that the delay was due to the vacant posts of Superintendents and Assistants in the third petitioner's Office and the staff were also deputed to Lok Sabha Election duty. 9. The delay should be satisfactorily explained. The reasons stated must be convincing. However, it is very clear from the affidavit filed by the third petitioner that the delay has not been satisfactorily explained. At every stage, there is unexplained and unreasonable delay. No acceptable reason has been given for the delay. In such circumstances, the petitioners are not entitled to any indulgence. 10. In view of the foregoings, this petition fails and it is dismissed. No costs.