1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2189 OF 2010 Sayyad Mukhtar Ali Sayyad Mumtaj Ali Age 54 years, Occ. Business R/o. Bakkulguda Hus. No. 3-11-106 Near Sangar Mandir, Aurangabad. .. petitioners Versus 1] The Deputy Director of Land Record, Aurangabad. 2] The Superintendent of Land Record, Aurangabad. .. Respondent. --- Mr. S.S. Deve, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Y.M. Kshirsagar, AGP for respondents. CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 19th April, 2010. ORAL ORDER :- 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, taken up for final hearing. 2] An order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Aurangabad, dated 25/1/2010 refusing to condone the delay of 9 months caused in presenting an appeal is the subject matter of challenge in this petition. 2 3] The petitioner tendered an application to the Suptd. Of Land Records, Aurangabad requesting for directing certain corrections in the record pertaining to the plot belonging to the petitioner. After due enquiry, the application tendered by the petitioner was rejected by the Supdt. Of Land Records in view of the order passed on 15/4/2008. The petitioner, as such, approached the appellate authority by presenting an appeal, which was presented beyond limitation. The petitioner, therefore, presented an application seeking condonation of delay. In the application, it is contended that the petitioner was not aware about the procedural intricacies of the matter and was not aware about the forum of of appeal. The delay occurred is not intentional and is caused due to his ignorance about the procedural intricacies. 4] The matter pertains to the entitlement of the petitioner to the urban property and correction of the record. Considering the nature of the dispute, the appellate authority ought to have adopted a liberal view of the matter. In my view, the appellate authority ought to have decided the appeal on its own merit. 5] Considering the relevant circumstances, the learned AGP appearing for the State has no serious objection for condoning the delay and directing the appellate authority to decide the appeal on its own merit. In this view of the matter, the writ petition deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Aurangabad, on 25/1/2010 is quashed and set aside. The 3 application seeking condonation of delay in presenting the appeal tendered by the petitioner on 16/9/2009 shall be deemed to have been allowed. The appellate authority is directed to decide the appeal on its own merit, and in accordance with law. Rule made absolute accordingly. In the circumstances, there shall be no orders as to costs. [R.M. BORDE,J.] Grt/-