1 Civil Application No.6043 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6043 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.10298 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and another APPLICANTS VERSUS Madhukar S/o.Baburao Nalge RESPONDENT WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6044 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.10329 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and another APPLICANTS VERSUS Gurling S/o.Narhari Deshmane RESPONDENT WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6045 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.10334 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and another APPLICANTS VERSUS Kamlabai Maruti Katke RESPONDENT 2 Civil Application No.6043 of 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6046 OF 2009 IN FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.10335 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and another APPLICANTS VERSUS Laxmibai Murlidhar Deshmane RESPONDENT Mr.N.H.Borade, learned A.G.P. For State in all applications. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 25/02/2011 PER COURT : 1. By these applications, the applicant/State has prayed for condonation of delay of 409 days in preferring the first appeals against the judgment and award passed in Land Reference Application No.310/2003, which was decided by the judgment and order dated 14/12/2007. As all these civil applications in the proposed first appeals arises out of the common judgment delivered in L.A.R.No.310/2003, hence all these civil applications to be disposed of by way of common order. 2. Heard learned A.G.P. for State. Perused the contents raised in the application. 3. It is alleged that the judgment and order was passed in the said Land Acquisition Reference on 14/12/2007. Applicant has 3 Civil Application No.6043 of 2009 applied for the certified copy of the said judgment and award on 16/02/2008. No explanation was given for delay of 60 days in filing the application to obtain the certified copies. The certified copies were ready for delivery within 10 days i.e. on 26/02/2008. The certified copies were collected on 07/03/2008. Then the proposals were forwarded to the Law and Judiciary Department on 07/05/2008. Thereafter, the proposals to file the appeals were sanctioned on the very day and received in the office of Government Pleader on 08/05/2008. The draft was prepared on 28/05/2008. But actually the appeals were presented alongwith the applications for condonation of delay on 07/05/2009. For this one year delay, there is absolutely no explanation offered in the application except one line that the delay in presenting the appeal is not deliberate. If no grounds are mentioned in the application to condone the delay, it will not be proper to say that the grounds mentioned in the application to condone the delay are proper and satisfactory. In absence of any explanation about the delay caused in presenting the appeals, it amounts to lethargy on the part of the office of the Government Pleader in presenting the appeals beyond the period of limitation by 409 days. As delay is not explained at all, there are no merits in the application to condone the delay. All these applications sans any merits, hence rejected. Court fees, if any paid, be refunded to applicant as per rules. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/FEB. 2011/ca6043-09