IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 22-01-2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.43510 of 2006 1.Bakkiyam 2.D.Mani .... Petitioners Versus 1.The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Salem. 2.M/s.S.L.T.Animal Feeds (P) Ltd., SKC Road, Vendipalayam, Erode-9 3.National Insurance Co-Ltd., Branch Office,78,TVS Street, Near Panner Selvam Park, Erode-638 001. .... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 30.01.2006 made in W.C.I.A.No.77 of 2005, quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent herein to entertain the claim petition filed by the petitioners and to dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manokaran For Respondents : Mr.S.Gopinathan(R1) Additional Government Pleader No appearance (R2) N.Vijayaraghavan(R3) O R D E R The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the first respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 30.01.2006, in W.C.I.A No.77 of 2005, stating that the petitioners had not shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the workmen's compensation case. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners had also submitted that they had filed a Motor Accident Claims Original Petition, in M.C.O.P.No.758 of 2002, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Principal District Court, Namakkal. Though the said petition had been withdrawn, the certified copy of the order had not been made ready by the registry of the tribunal, at the time of the filing of the workmen's compensation case, before the first respondent. Therefore, the petitioners had not been in a position to show sufficient cause for the delay in the filing of the workmen's compensation case, before the first respondent. 2.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had also submitted that the petitioners would not claim the interest on the compensation to be paid, till the date of the filing of the workmen's compensation case, before the first respondent. 2.At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent had submitted that the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 30.01.2006, made in W.C.I.A.No.77 of 2005, may be set aside and the first respondent may be directed to take on file the workmen's compensation case and pass necessary orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, as well as to the respondents 2 and 3. 3.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners, as well as the respondents, the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 30.01.2006, made in W.C.I.A.No.77 of 2005, is set aside and the first respondent is directed to take on file, the workmen's compensation case and decide the same, on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, as well as to the second and the third respondents. This Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar arr To 1.The Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Salem. 1 cc To Mr.N.Manoharan, Advocate, SR.5094 1 cc To Mr.N.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate, SR.5048 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.5140 Writ Petition Nos.43510 of 2006 TEJ (CO) RH (10.2.11) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/