M.P.No.1 of 2012 in W.P.No.3962 of 2008 M.P.No.1 of 2012 in W.P.No.3962 of 2008 R. SURESH KUMAR, J. This miscellaneous petition is filed to condone the delay of 455 days in filing the restoration application in MP.SR.No.27670 of 2012 to restore the writ petition in W.P.No.3962 of 2008. 2. The main writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 22.12.2006, whereby the request of the petitioner for getting re-employment after he superannuated, was rejected. 3. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 18.11.2010, since there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, it was directed to be listed on the next day ie., on 19.11.2010 under the caption “For dismissal”. Even on that date, since there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner, the writ petition was dismissed for non prosecution. 4. Though the writ petition was dismissed on 19.11.2010 for want of prosecution, the petitioner had not come before this Court immediately to restore the writ petition, however he had come out with a petition to restore the writ petition with a delay of 445 days. Therefore, in order to condone the delay of 445 days, the present miscellaneous petition has been filed. 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ M.P.No.1 of 2012 in W.P.No.3962 of 2008 5. Perused the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition. The petitioner has stated in the affidavit that because of his illness he could not give instructions to the counsel and therefore he could not appear on the particular dates ie., on 18.11.2010 and 19.11.2010, therefore, it was dismissed for default. Subsequently, after recovering from illness after 445 days, the petitioner had come out with a petition to restore the writ petition and therefore there has been a delay of 445 days and it should condoned. 6. In support of the said reasoning of ill health as stated by the petitioner, no documents have been filed before this Court. 7. Assuming that it is for the health reasons that the petitioner could not give instructions, for more than one year ie., upto 445 days, how the petitioner had been precluded from coming up with a petition to restore the writ petition, even on the health grounds, has not been explained and not even a single document with reference to the averment in the said affidavit has been filed. 8. When the case is called today, no-one is appearing for the petitioner. Since the petitioner has not given any supporting documents in support of the reasoning stated in the affidavit filed in support of the present miscellaneous petition, this Court is not inclined to accept the reasoning stated in the affidavit to condone the delay of 445 days. 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ M.P.No.1 of 2012 in W.P.No.3962 of 2008 9. Condoning the delay is not a matter of course or a routine affair as the same if it occurs has to be explained to the satisfaction of the court with proper reasons with supporting documents. Unless such a satisfactory reason has come out from the litigant, the Court is not under any compulsion to condone such delay, that too huge delay of more than a year without any acceptable or plausible reason and therefore, this Court is not inclined to accept this petition. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. 04.01.2021 Kst 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ M.P.No.1 of 2012 in W.P.No.3962 of 2008 R. SURESH KUMAR, J. kst M.P.No.1 of 2012 in W.P.No.3962 of 2008 04.01.2021 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/