ORDER :

1. State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department and the District Collector, Chennai are appellants in the present Original Side Appeal. The appeal is directed against the impugned order passed in O.A.No.401 of 2025 in C.S.No.81 of 2025. The suit has been instituted by the first respondent/Madras Race Club against the State of Tamil Nadu to declare G.O.(Ms.)No.343 Revenue and Disaster Management Department dated 06.09.2024 terminating the lease and the consequential letter and notice issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu as null and void and consequential relief of permanent injunction was also sought for.

2. O.A. No.401 of 2025 has been filed not to dispossess the first respondent/plaintiff from the suit schedule property.

3. An interim order of 'status quo' was granted by the learned single Judge of this Court. Counter Affidavit and Additional Counter Affidavit have been filed. It is submitted by the State that operation of order of status quo is impeding the works relating to development and strengthening of ponds, apart from the proposed Eco Park. The order of status quo would adversely impact public at large since all works have come to a stand still, moreso, with the onset of monsoon and heavy rains being forecast over the next few weeks. It was submitted that the application was heard and orders reserved by the learned Judge on 18.08.2025. Since orders are not pronounced State is compelled to file this appeal, else in view of the impending rains the order of status quo would adversely affect public interest.

4. C.M.P. No.25695 of 2025 has been filed to condone the delay of 74 days in filing the Original Side Appeal. The matter was taken up for hearing by this Bench on 17.10.2025. The State raised their apprehension that since the monsoon has arrived and heavy rain fall being forecast by the Meteorological Department throughout the State, order of status quo is impeding the State from initiating swift/necessary action to avoid flooding and preserve rain water in the public interest.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent, while arguing the condonation of delay petition, made a submission that the first respondent/Madras Race Club has no objection and they will not cause any obstruction to any work relating to strengthening or developing the ponds as it is in public interest. Considering the pleadings and arguments, delay of 74 days in filing the Original Side Appeal was condoned by this Court on 17.10.2025.

6. Subsequently, the Original Side Appeal was numbered by the Registry and listed for admission before this Bench today (22.10.2025). The first respondent filed an affidavit seeking for the recusal of one of us (S.M.Subramaniam, J.) from hearing the present case. Since the affidavit has been filed by the first respondent, it necessitated this Court to decide the said issue as a preliminary issue before proceeding any further with the admission of the Original Side Appeal.

7. Reasons stated in the affidavit are that one of us (S.M.Subramaniam, J.) passed final orders in W.P.Nos.29644 to 29646 of 2017 on 29.03.2023 filed by the first respondent/Madras Race Club. In the said writ order, certain observations were made, which in the view of the first respondent, are adverse findings which are conclusive. It was thus submitted, there is likelihood of bias inasmuch as observations also touch upon validity of the lease entered into between the State of Tamil Nadu and the Madras Race Club several decades back. Second reason being one of us (S.M.Subramaniam, J.) appeared on behalf of one Mr.Jayapoorna Chandra Rao and his family members in a suit filed by the first respondent in C.S.No.366 of 2004. Subsequently, the said Jayapoorna Chandra Rao and his family members had filed another suit in C.S.No.63 of 2005 wherein one of us (S.M.Subramaniam, J.) was engaged by Mr.Jayapoorna Chandra Rao. Respondent Club is a party in both suits.

8.