THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO W.A.M.P.No.694 of 2011 AND WRIT APPEAL No.414 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) The Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 12.02.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.20368 of 2000. Since there is a delay of 719 days in filing the appeal, W.A.M.P.No.694 of 2011 is filed seeking to condone the said delay. It is not necessary to go into the merits of the controversy between the parties. It is an admitted fact that pending the writ petition, the writ appellants filed W.P.M.P.No.6778 of 2004 to implead them as party respondents contending that the writ petitioners are not entitled to any relief as sought for in the writ petition in view of various civil disputes between the parties. When the writ petition was decided by the learned Single Judge, the said W.P.M.P. is pending. One of the reasons assigned by the petitioners for condoning the delay is that when the writ petition was taken up for consideration by the learned Single Judge, the implead petition filed by the petitioners herein was not posted along with the writ petition and their counsel’s name also did not appear in the cause list and that they were not aware of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The said fact has not been disputed in the counter-affidavit filed by the writ petitioners. Admittedly, when the papers of implead petition were served upon the learned counsel for the writ petitioners, it is incumbent upon the learned counsel for the writ petitioners to bring it to the notice of the Court that implead petition has been filed and the same has not been listed along with the writ petition. Since the said fact was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge while disposing of the writ petition, we feel that it is a fit case to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the order dated 12.02.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.20368 of 2000 is set aside. Consequently, the writ petition is restored to file, so that the learned Single Judge can hear the matter afresh along with the W.P.M.P and dispose of the same on merits. In the result, W.A.M.P. and the writ appeal are allowed. _____________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J ____________________ RAJA ELANGO, J Dated 13.06.2011 va