State Filing Appeals After Great Delay: Madras High Court Directs Vigilance Probe
The Madras High Court was considering a petition filed by the Greater Chennai Corporation to condone the delay of 1421 days in filing the appeal.
Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Justice G.Arul Murugan, Madras High Court
While dismissing a condonation application filed by the Greater Chennai Corporation, the Madras High Court has observed that appeals are being filed by the State after a great delay, which is either gross negligence or a case of connivance with the other party. Issuing a direction to the Chief Secretary of the State, the High Court also ordered a discreet examination by the Vigilance Department.
The High Court was considering a petition filed by the Greater Chennai Corporation to condone the delay of 1421 days in filing the appeal. The application was filed on the ground that the Certified Copy of the Order of the High Court could not be found, as the same was obtained in the year 2021, and after a period of 4 years, the same could not be found in the Corporation Office.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan held, “At this stage, we are constrained to issue a direction to the Chief Secretary of the State as we are finding that in large number of cases, the appeals are being filed after a great delay and lame excuses, as in the present case, are being made. It is either gross negligence or a case of connivance with the other party. In case of such a gross delay and absence of any reason assigned, the controlling authority is required to hold appropriate inquiry. We are of the view that such cases where appeals are not being filed since long, should also be discreetly examined by the Vigilance Department of the Government to find out whether the non-filing of appeal where the State or its authority have high stakes involved, was result of gross negligence or a case of connivance.”
Advocate E.C.Ramesh represented the Appellants.
Reasoning
The Bench noted that no sufficient cause was shown, and it appeared that the officials concerned dealing with the files were completely indolent and sat over the matter without doing anything. The Bench also reaffirmed how the Apex Court, in many cases, has held that the period of limitation is required to be explained by the State, and it does not stand on any exalted position. Finding that the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the application do not constitute sufficient cause, the Bench dismissed the application.
Taking note of the cases where appeals are not being filed for a long time, the Bench held that the same should be discreetly examined by the Vigilance Department of the Government.
“A copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu”, it directed.
Cause Title: The Commissioner v. Kannammal Education Trust (Case No.: CMP No.4315 of 2026)