1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7359 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.15736 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7360 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.15698 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7361 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.15732 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7362 OF 2007 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.15734 OF 2007 The State of Maharashtra and another APPLICANTS VERSUS Chhagan S/o.Santram Kate, RESPONDENT Mr.V.H.Dighe, learned counsel for applicants in all the applications. Mr.D.R.Jaybhar, learned counsel for respondent in all the applications. 2 (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 05/09/2009 PER COURT : 1. By these 4 civil applications, the applicants have prayed for condonation of 351 days delay in preferring appeals against the judgment and award passed by The First Ad-hoc Additional District Judge, Beed in LAR No.281/1999, 283/1999, 284/1999 and 490/1999, which were disposed of on 22/11/2005. As all these civil applications arises out of the same judgment and order, and based on identical facts and common question of Law is involved can be disposed of by one common order. 2. Heard respective counsels for the parties. 3. It appears that the impugned judgment and award was passed on 22/11/2005. Application for certified copies was submitted on 23/11/2005 and the certified copies were ready on 14/06/2006 and were collected on 11/07/2006. It appears that thereafter proposal was forwarded to The Law and Judiciary Department for sanction to prefer the appeals against the judgment and award impugned. The proposal was received on 18/09/2006 in the office of A.G.P. Aurangabad to file the appeals against the judgment and award. According to learned AGP that on 07/08/2007 the typed copies of the judgment and award were prepared and submitted to the office of G.P. and thereafter the appeals were presented on 28/08/2007. 3 Considering these grounds which according to him are just and sufficient to condone the delay and hence prayed to allow these civil applications. 4. As against this it is submitted across the bar on behalf of the respondents that after the proposal was received in the office of G.P. on 18/09/2006, it was assigned to different AGP’s to draft the appeals on 19/09/2006. Till 07/08/2007 during the period of 11 months why the typed copies of the judgment were not ready, is not explained anywhere in the application at all. In the premise, the delay is not explained sufficiently, hence these civil applications are liable to be rejected. 5. Reference can be given of the Division Bench Judgment in the matter of State of Maharashtra and others Versus Vithu Kalya Govari and others, reported in 2008(6) Mh.L.J. 239 wherein it is observed by the Division Bench that in the appeals filed by State against any Land Acquisition proceeding, condonation of delay in filing appeals merely because the delay has occurred because of “official hassle” and approval at different levels. This can hardly justify condonation of delay. It is further observed by the Division Bench that before the delay can be condoned and claimants can be subjected to a prolonged litigation, the onus to show sufficient cause lies upon the applicant State. For the reasons that the applicants have filed to show sufficient or reasonable cause ( in fact they have shown no cause) for the condonation of delay, it is declined. In these 4 4 civil applications, where the proposal was received promptly by the Office of Law and Judiciary on 19/02/2006 to the Office of A.G.P. High Court, Bench at Aurangabad and all the appears were drafted and ready on 07/08/2007. So far as this delay of 11 months in drafting the appeals is not properly explained by the applicants and if it is so, as observed by the Division Bench judgment cited supra, the civil applications are devoid of any merit as the delay is not sufficiently explained, hence all the 4 civil applications are liable to be rejected. Consequently the accompanied first appeals alongwith these civil applications stand dismissed as rejected with no order as to costs. The applicants are entitled for refund of requisite court fee as per rules. All the civil applications stand disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/SEP 2009/ca7359-07 5