STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. R. JOTHIKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Respondents in OSA No.172 of 2020, which appeal had been disposed by order dtd. 12/3/2021, have applied for review of the said order. Mr.R.Shunmugasundaram, Learned Advocate-General appearing on their behalf, points out that the condition imposed on the State to deposit a certain amount as security in paragraph 12 of the said order is contrary to the mandate in Rule 8A of Order XXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' for short), which reads below:-

(2.) After service of notice in this application for review, Mr.R.Subramanian, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the Appellant in OSA.No. 172 of 2020, but has not been able to demonstrate with any justifiable reason as to why the said rule quoted from the Code would not get attracted to the instant case.

(3.) In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered view that the directions issued in paragraph 12 of the order under review ought not to have been made and that part of the said order is alone recalled. As now accepted by the Respondents in OSA.No.172 of 2020, in the event of ultimately fixing any monetary liability on the State in the suit in C.S.No. 13 of 2020 pending in the Original Side of this Court, the Plaintiff would be entitled to recover that amount as expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State under Article 202(3)(e) of the Constitution. The order dtd. 12/3/2021 in OSA No. 172 of 2020 shall remain intact in all other respects. It is needless to add here that none of the parties herein shall be precluded from working out their rights if they have any other grievance in appropriate proceedings in the manner recognised by law.