Jawath Ali MohamedAharib Vs Principal Commissioner & Ex-Officio (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that date of receipt of copy of order is to be accepted in absence of any contrary evidence by the respondents/ department. Accordingly, dismissal of appeal on ground of limitation not justified. Hence, matter remanded back for fresh consideration.
Facts- This writ petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 19.07.2022 passed by the first respondent dismissing the petitioner’s appeal on the ground of limitation. The petitioner categorically contends that he has received the order in original only on 16.08.2017 and the statutory appeal was filed before the second respondent on 28.08.2017 which is well within the period of limitation.
Conclusion- Held that there is no evidence produced by the respondents that the petitioner had received the order in original at an earlier date, it has to be presumed that the petitioner had received the order in original only on 16.08.2017 as claimed by the petitioner in this writ petition. If the petitioner had received the order in original on 16.08.2017, then the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner before the second respondent is well within the period of limitation. However, under the impugned order, without evidence to the contrary the second respondent has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner only on the ground of limitation by disbelieving the statement of the petitioner that he had received the order in original on 16.08.2017. The appeal was also filed on 28.08.2017, which is well within the period of limitation from 16.08.2017. Thus, the impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 20.09.2017 and confirmed by the first respondent dated 19.07.2022 has to be quashed and the matter has to be remanded back to the second respondent for fresh consideration, on merits and in accordance with law by holding that the appeal filed by the petitioner is well within the period of limitation. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed.
