1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 607 OF 2005 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 17471 OF 2004 The State of Maharashtra through Collector, Latur ..Applicant (Orig.Resp.) VERSUS Vishwanath Tukaram Pawar ..Respondent (Claimant) ..... Shri K.B.Choudhary, AGP for the applicant None for the respondent despite service. ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 6th November, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Perused. Heard learned A.G.P. for the applicant. 2 The applicant has preferred the present application for 2 condonation of delay of 3291 days occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal, challenging the common judgment and award dated 31.3.1995 rendered by learned Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Latur in L.A.R.No. 2153 of 1990. 3 The applicant submits that after passing the aforesaid judgment and award, the applicant applied for certified copies thereof and after receipt of the same, the applicant approached to the office of District Government Pleader and sought the information for filing First Appeal before this Court. On receipt of the information, the applicant collected relevant documents and submitted proposal to the Law and Judiciary department for sanction, which was kept before the Committee for decision and accordingly the Committee took the decision to acquiesce the proposal on 14.12.1995. 4 The applicant also submits that Division Bench of this court in First Appeal No. 1036 of 2002 observed that in large number of land acquisition cases, the proposals are either not submitted or even after receipt of the proposals the appeals are not filed. Therefore, this Court passed an order in Civil Application No. 7117 of 2001 in First Appeal No. 1036 of 2002 on 21.2.2003 and thereby directed the Collector, Latur to submit report in 3 respect of Land Acquisition Cases from Latur District. Accordingly, the Collector, Latur submitted the report to this Court on 29.4.2003. As per the said report, there were in all 6311 Land Acquisition References, which came to be decided by Reference Court in Latur District. The committee took decision to acquiesce with the award in 4000 cases out of the afore said cases. Hence, considering that the Committee has taken a decision to acquiesce with the award in large number of cases, this court directed the Secretary, Law and Judiciary Department, Government of Maharashtra on 2.9.2003 to take appropriate decision on reconsideration of the earlier decision not to file appeal in 4000 and odd cases from Latur District. As per the said directions, a legal cell was constituted by the Law and Judiciary Department for the purpose of scrutiny of the proposal. Accordingly, the Committee reconsidered and took the decision to file First Appeal on 28.8.2003. 5 Thereafter the Law and Judiciary Department sanctioned the proposal and forwarded the same to the office of the Government Pleader, High Court, Bench at Aurangabad on 30.8.2003. All the proposals were scrutinized thoroughly and thereafter communication was made to the Collector, Latur so as to make compliance of the same as early as possible. 4 6 However, the applicant submits that since about 4000 and odd proposals were received to the office of the Government Pleader, some time was consumed in drafting and typing the appeal memo and other documents. Hence, delay was caused in filing First Appeal, which is neither deliberate nor intentional, but same was caused due to afore said administrative exigencies. 7 The applicant further submits that as per order passed by this Court, earlier proposals were reconsidered and decision was taken to file First Appeals in the proposals which were earlier acquiesced of. Hence, delay of 3291 days was caused in filing the First Appeal and applicant submits that delay is required to be condoned. 8 Nobody appears for the respondent in spite of service and the respondent has not opposed the present application. 9 Considering the averments made in the present application and also considering the submissions advanced by learned A.G.P. for the applicant State, it appears that the facts and circumstances in the present matter are peculiar and delay appears to have been caused in filing the accompanying First 5 Appeal because of reconsideration of the proposal as afore said. Therefore, same does not appear to be intentional, deliberate or willful. Moreover, the applicant has explained the delay occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal properly and satisfactorily and, therefore, same deserves to be condoned in the interest of justice. 10 In the circumstances, the present application deserves to be allowed and accordingly same stands allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ thereof and delay of 3291 days caused in filing the accompanying First Appeal stands condoned. The accompanying First Appeal be registered and numbered accordingly. 11 However, it is made clear that the delay occurred in filing the accompanying First Appeal has been condoned by the afore said order, in the light of peculiar facts and circumstances of the present matter and due to reconsideration of the proposals as afore said, and hence, the present order restricts to the facts and circumstances of the present matter only. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/ca607.05 6