Executive Engineer, M.I.W., Jalgaon v. Dipak Bhagwat Gite And ORS

1 CA- 4252-2018+group

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4252 OF 2018 IN FAST/6823/2018 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.W. JALGAON

VERSUS

YUVRAJ JAGAN DHOBI AND ANR.

WITH CA/4254/2018 IN FAST/6818/2018 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11347 OF 2017 IN FAST/24138/2017 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.W. JALGAON

VERSUS

YAMUNABAI SHAMRAO CHOUDHARI (DEAD) THR LRS KISHOR AND ORS.

WITH CA/11357/2017 IN FAST/24131/2017 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11349 OF 2017 IN FAST/28279/2017 EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.I.W., JALGAON

VERSUS

MAHENDRASING MAKESING DESHMUKH AND ORS WITH CA/11335/2017 IN FAST/27962/2017;

CA/11337/2017 IN FAST/28248/2017;

CA/11339/2017 IN FAST/27444/2017;

CA/11341/2017 IN FAST/24135/2017;

CA/11343/2017 IN FAST/27450/2017;

CA/11351/2017 IN FAST/28419/2017;

CA/11353/2017 IN FAST/27405/2017;

CA/11355/2017 IN FAST/27453/2017;

CA/11559/2017 IN FAST/27447/2017;

2 CA- 4252-2018+group ...

Mrs. Vaishali D. Jadhav, Advocate for applicants in all CAs Mr. R.P. Adgaonkar, Advocate h/f Mr. V.B. Patil, Advocate for respondents-claimants Mr. A.D. Namde, AGP for respondent-State ...

CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE : 26-03-2018 ORDER :

1.

Issue notice to the respondents in civil applications no. 4252 of 2018 and 4254 of 2018.

2.

Notices in rest of civil applications have already been issued.

3.

Mr. R.P. Adgaonkar, learned Advocate h/f Mr. V.B. Patil, learned Advocate waives notice for respondents-original claimants. Mr. Namde, learned A.G.P. waives notice for rest of respondents in all civil applications.

4.

Heard learned counsel for parties by consent, forthwith.

5.

Acquiring body is before this court seeking condonation of delay in preferring appeals.

6.

It is contended that the land acquisition references in aforesaid matters, had been decided in 2016 enhancing

3 CA- 4252-2018+group compensation excessively. It is further being drawn attention to that after decision had been rendered by reference court, the decision underwent consideration at many stages of getting opinion and taking a decision. Lot of intervening steps in the same had been involved from one officer to the other, from one section to the other, from one department to other department and one office to the other. Even arrangement for funds to prefer appeal/s had to be made. All this has caused delay in approaching the court. Delay has neither been deliberate nor intentional and delay, looking at the circumstances, would not be liable to be dubbed as inordinate.

7.

Learned counsel for applicants further purports to point out that the matters involve merits.

8.

All aforesaid contentions on behalf of the applicants, although are being opposed, yet, respondents are not in a position to challenge veracity of the contentions appearing in the applications.

9.

It also appears that quite a few claimants are before this court against the very same award and their first appeals are pending.

4 CA- 4252-2018+group 10.

In the circumstances, while the delay is sought to be reasoned out, veracity of which could not be challenged with efficacy, expediency requires the same should be given due. 11.

As such, delay is condoned. Civil applications are accordingly allowed and are disposed of.

12.

First appeals accordingly to proceed with.

[SUNIL P. DESHMUKH] JUDGE arp/