STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. VITHU KALYA GOVARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above mentioned appeals have been preferred by the State of Maharashtra against the judgment and award of the reference court and are barred by time. The State has filed applications for condonation of delay on somewhat similar explanation in all these cases. Thus, it would be appropriate to dispose of all these applications and the appeals by by a common judgment. The relevant facts giving rise to the present appeals are (reference is made to the facts of First Appeal Stamp No.11231 of 2008 and First Appeal Stamp No.22703 of 2008 an under. The State Government issued a notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act, on 3rd February, 1970. In furtherance to this notification, declaration under section 6 was published in the official gazette on 11.1.1973. The State Government took possession of the lands in the year 1984. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, the Special Land Acquisition Officer made his award under section 11 of the Act on 10.8.1984. The lands in all these cases were acquired from the revenue estate of village Panvel.

(2.) Before the learned reference court in all the land references, the case of the claimants was that Panvel-Diva Railway line has started and resultantly, Panvel city was developing. The potential of their land, thus, had gone up at the time of acquisition.

(3.) For seeking condonation of delay in filing the present appeals, the State of Maharashtra filed different applications viz. Civil Application No.3200 of 2007 in First Appeal Stamp No. 11231 of 2007 and Civil Application No.5442 of 2007 in First Appeal Stamp No.22703 of 2007. Applications in other appeals have also been filed on similar facts and circumstances. All the appeals in question are barred by two years 45 days to 2 years 63 days. In other words, all the appeals are barred by time by more than two years. In the applications for condonation of delay and even during the course of arguments, it is argued that there are various steps in the Government hierarchy that have to be taken before an appeal is filed against the judgment and award of the reference court. Various officials hassles and steps, thus, resulted in consuming the time and resulting in delay of more than two years in filing the present appeals.