1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD C. A. NO. 3892 OF 2005 IN F. A. ST. NO. 26731 OF 2003 The State of Maharashtra - - Applicant Versus Madhav Bali Kadam - - Respondent WITH C. A. NO. 3897 OF 2005 IN F. A ST. NO. 26779 OF 2003 The State of Maharashtra - - Applicant Versus Maruti Ramchandra Nelwade - - Respondent WITH C. A. NO. 3896 OF 2005 IN F. A. ST. NO. 26786 OF 2003 The State of Maharashtra - - Applicant Versus Kalawati Khandappa Sakhare - - Respondent 2 WITH C. A. NO. 3895 OF 2005 IN F. A. ST. NO. 26782 OF 2003 The State of Maharashtra - - Applicant Versus Babruwan Pandharinath Garte - - Respondent WITH C. A. NO. 3894 OF 2005 IN F. A. ST. NO. 26784 OF 2003 The State of Maharashtra - - Applicant Versus Ashok Sangappa Gaokare & others- - Respondents WITH C. A. NO. 3893 OF 2005 IN F. A. ST. NO. 26789 OF 2003 The State of Maharashtra - - Applicant Versus Ishwar Neelkanth Kadam - - Respondent Mrs. S. B. Wadmare, A. G. P. for the applicants/State. Shri S. S. Manale, Advocate for the respondents. 3 CORAM : K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 19TH JUNE, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned A. G. P. for the applicants. There is delay of 665 days in causing to file the first appeal seeking the challenge of order dated 24.08.2001 in L. A. R. No. 547/1996. The reasons assigned by the learned A. G. P., is receipt of court fees from the Government to make the appeal. Basically this cannot be the ground to condone the delay, that apart, the order that communicated above is dated 24.08.2001, while the copy application was moved on 13.04.2004 and it was received on 26.04.2004. The yawning gap between the order and copy application is not explained. The applications for condonation of delay rejected along with appeals in all the matters. [ K. U. CHANDIWAL ] JUDGE bsb/June 09/CA 3892.05