HIRABAI SONU WANJARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the petitions are filed challenging the orders passed by the Collector refusing to entertain the statutory applications under Sec. 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Settlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the "Right to Fair Compensation Act") for making reference to the competent Court of the land owners, who have raised dispute pertaining to the quantum of compensation that has been awarded in pursuance to the land acquired by respondent Nos.3 and 4.

(2.) Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the reference applications of the petitioners in Writ Petition No.1508 of 2026 and Writ Petition No.1509 of 2026 have been rejected by respondent No.3 on the ground of delay of 67 and 337 days respectively. Learned Advocate for the petitioners further submits that the impugned orders rejecting the applications for condonation of delay and thereby dismissing the reference applications are bad in law, as the learned Collector is competent enough under Sec. 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation Act to consider the cause made out by the petitioners in delay applications and condone the delay, if the same is not beyond a period of one year.

(3.) Learned AGPs appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 in respective petitions state that the applications preferred for condonation of delay in filing the reference applications under Sec. 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation Act do not disclose any sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the Collector and, therefore, the impugned orders are rightly passed.