DEVA DASS A/L SUNDARAJ 1. ) 1. MAJLIS BANDARAYA PULAU PINANG 2. ) 2. JABATAN PERKHIDMATAN AWAM, MALAYSIA

DEVA DASS A/L SUNDARAJ 1. ) 1. MAJLIS BANDARAYA PULAU PINANG 2. ) 2. JABATAN PERKHIDMATAN AWAM, MALAYSIA

The extension of time was refused because the petition was filed 5 months and 9 days after notification, and the reasons proffered (ignorance of the time limit, family responsibilities, need to work, occasional illness) did not amount to a good reason to justify extending the statutory three‑month period;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
PA-25-8-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant: DEVA DASS A/L SUNDARAJ; Respondent 1: MAJLIS BANDARAYA PULAU PINANG; Respondent 2: JABATAN PERKHIDMATAN AWAN, MALAYSIA
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 January 1900
Case Number
PA-25-8-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review; Application for Extension of Time Heard and Dismissed; Petition Struck Out; Amendment Application Struck Out; Appeal Against Dismissal Lodged
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed; Petition for judicial review dismissed; amendment application struck out.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Extension of Time, Delay, Leave to Apply for Judicial Review, Strike Out
Administrative Law Employment Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Extension of Time Delay Leave to Apply for Judicial Review Strike Out

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DEVA DASS A/L SUNDARAJ

Applicant

MAJLIS BANDARAYA PULAU PINANG

Respondent 1

JABATAN PERKHIDMATAN AWAN, MALAYSIA

Respondent 2

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review; Application for Extension of Time Heard and Dismissed; Petition Struck Out; Amendment Application Struck Out; Appeal Against Dismissal Lodged

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant an extension of time to file judicial review after the three‑month limit
  2. 2 Whether the reasons for delay (ignorance of time limit, family care, need to work, illness) constitute a 'good reason' to extend time
  3. 3 Whether the petition filed out of time should be dismissed and the amendment application struck out

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because the petition was filed 5 months and 9 days after notification, and the reasons proffered (ignorance of the time limit, family responsibilities, need to work, occasional illness) did not amount to a good reason to justify extending the statutory three‑month period; accordingly the petition was dismissed and the amendment struck out.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed; Petition for judicial review dismissed; amendment application struck out.

Orders

  • Application for extension of time dismissed
  • Petition for judicial review dismissed