1 WP-8916-2011 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8916 OF 2011 The District Collector & ors. ...Petitioners Versus Suryakant Anant Kapase & ors. ...Respondents Mr.V.P.Malvankar, `A’ Panel Counsel for petitioners. Mr.M.B.Gawade with Ms.Rupali Desai for respondents. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. November 11, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard Mr.Malvankar, the learned AGP. By the impugned order dated 14/7/2009 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal while allowing O.A.No.566 of 2007 partly, the petitioners have been directed to 2 WP-8916-2011 consider the cases of the original applicants for condoning the breaks under Rule 48(1) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules for the purpose of pension only. 2. This petition has been filed after more than two years and in para 13 of the petition memo it has been stated that there is no delay in filing the petition and it is well within time. It has been further stated that though the impugned order was passed on 14/7/2009, the State Government accorded sanction only on 23/8/2011 and the petition has been filed expeditiously. 3. No further explanation has been provided as to why the Law and Judiciary Department took more than two years to accord sanction. The petition is hopelessly time barred and the explanation furnished in para 13 is self contradictory. 4. Even otherwise the reasoning set out by the Tribunal in O.A. No. 566 of 2007 partly does not suffer from an error apparent on the face of the record. 3 WP-8916-2011 5. The petition is rejected summarily. (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)