- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
The Trend of Filing the Government Appeals Belatedly Has Become A Habit On The Part Of the Officials: Madras HC
The Trend of Filing the Government Appeals Belatedly Has Become A Habit On The Part Of the Officials: Madras HC A division bench of Justices N Kirubakaran and B Pugalendhi came down heavily on the officials and observed, "In fact, the trend of filing the appeal belatedly has become a habit on the part of the officials for the reasons best known to them, even though the government has to...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Trend of Filing the Government Appeals Belatedly Has Become A Habit On The Part Of the Officials: Madras HC
A division bench of Justices N Kirubakaran and B Pugalendhi came down heavily on the officials and observed, "In fact, the trend of filing the appeal belatedly has become a habit on the part of the officials for the reasons best known to them, even though the government has to pay heavy costs in case the delay is condoned or to spend huge money by implementing the order passed by the courts."
The bench before whom the delayed appeal came up despite the order copy of the single judge was sent way back on November 25, 2016 pointed out that contempt petitions were sometimes filed and the order passed in the writ petition itself would not be brought to the notice of the authority, who is required to comply with the order.
The bench also held that whenever orders were passed, it should be immediately brought to the notice of the authority concerned, who is supposed to implement the order. "It is learnt that a few unscrupulous, corrupt elements, in the Department itself, by deliberate design with the connivance of the litigants, get the orders implemented, which are required to be assailed in the appeal, without filing the appeal in time and bringing to the notice of the higher officials only when orders in contempt petitions are to be passed," the bench said.
According to the Court, any staff, who is negligent in bringing the orders to the notice of the authority, who is supposed to implement the order, should be dealt with accordingly. O nly then can discipline be inculcated in the minds of the staff. Otherwise, Courts will be flooded with n-number of condone delay petitions and contempt petitions.
The bench also added that we are moving towards digitalisation and getting an order copy manually is a day-old practice and the orders are being uploaded in the official website of this court, then and there. "Within a few days, orders are being uploaded and the higher officials could very well verify in the website as to whether any orders have been passed against them so that they can take note of it and act accordingly."
The court imposed Rs. 25,000 as costs to condone the delay of 1,069 days on the part of the State's Education Department in filing the appeal.