D.Mallika Christi vs The Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 22959

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
B.PUGALENDHI, J
D.Mallika Christi – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. – Respondent
Writ Petition

Important Points

The court mandates the timely disposal of long-pending administrative review petitions to ensure justice.

Subject

Administrative Law - Writ Jurisdiction

Act Referred

Constitution of India

Headnote

The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Mandamus compelling the disposal of a long-pending review petition from 2009 concerning inclusion in an approved list. The court noted the petitioner's grievance due to the prolonged delay of over fifteen years in addressing the review petition. The court directed the respondent to take action within twelve weeks. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.S.Visvalingam
For the Respondents: Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar Special Government Pleader

Table of Content
1. writ filed for administration of review petition. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's observations on delay and direction for disposal. (Para 3 , 4)

ORDER

The petitioner with a grievance that the review petition filed by the petitioner before the first respondent in the year 2009 is still pending, has filed this writ petition.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the review petition filed by the petitioner on 22.07.2009 for inclusion of her name in the list of Assistant in the year 1995 is pending before the first respondent. In the meantime the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation on 30.06.2015.

3.On verification, the learned Special Government Pleader based on the instructions submits that the review of the petitioner is pending before the 1^st respondent.

4.It is very unfortunate that the review petition filed by the petitioner on 22.07.2009 is still kept pending for more than fifteen years. Therefore, the 1^st respondent is directed to take a decision and pass orders on the review petition filed by the petitioner on 22.07.2009, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.