Madras HC: Probe delay in filing appeals in encroachment cases

Madras HC: Probe delay in filing appeals in encroachment cases
Chennai: Taking serious note of the delay on the part of the govt in moving appeals against cases of encroachments and the lame excuses given for the delay, Madras high court directed the chief secretary to discreetly examine, through the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), whether the non-filing of an appeal, where the state or its authority had high stakes involved, was the result of gross negligence or a case of connivance."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 an appropriate inquiry," the first bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan said.
Chennai: West Asia Flight Cancellations, Tribal Land Verdict, Metro Commute Challenges and More
The court passed the order on an appeal moved by Greater Chennai Corporation (GCC) seeking to condone a 1,421-day (four-year) delay in filing an appeal against an order of a single judge.GCC submitted that the documents pertaining to the case, in which the single judge passed an order in 2021, could not be traced. Only on Sept 2, 2025, and Nov 10, 2025, the documents were obtained through the revenue department, based on which the appeal was moved.The issue pertained to a plea moved by Kannammal Educational Trust, T Nagar, Chennai, seeking a direction to GCC to pay adequate compensation for the acquisition of 27 cents of land owned by the trust in Mogappair for laying a road.
According to the trust, GCC took possession of the land, declaring it an encroachment.Disposing of the plea, a single judge of the court directed the district collector to survey the land in dispute and, if it was found that the road was laid within the boundaries of the land legally owned by the trust, GCC shall pay appropriate compensation. Aggrieved, GCC moved the present plea after a delay of four years. Refusing to condone the delay, the bench dismissed the application.

End of Article
Follow Us On Social Media