Gulab Yadav Angre vs Santosh Ramesh Angre And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 4771 Bom

                                                                        wp13432.17
                                       -1-


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                       936 WRIT PETITION NO.13432 OF 2017

                       GULAB YADAV ANGRE
                                VERSUS
               SANTOSH RAMESH ANGRE AND OTHERS
                                    .....
                Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. S. D. Kotkar
 Advocate for Respondents 1 and 2: Mr. V.C. Patil h/f Mr. P.B. Vikhe Patil
            AGP for Respondents 7 and 8: Mr. K.B. Jadhavar
                                       .....

                                             CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.
                                             DATED : 16th MARCH, 2021

 PER COURT:-


  1.      By consent, heard finally at admission stage.



 2.       Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the District

 Superintendent of Land Records, Ahmednagar has condoned the

 delay of 54 years for entertaining the appeal without giving any

 reason. There is no whisper in the order about the reasons

 considered by the District Superintendent of Land Records for

 condonation of delay of 54 years. Learned counsel submits that the

 District     Superintendent     of   Land   Records,      Ahmednagar            has

 considered the case on merits without deciding the issue about the

 condonation of delay.          Learned District Superintendent of Land

 Records, Ahmednagar has not considered as to whether the case is

 made out for condonation of delay of 54 years.



 3.       Learned A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 7 and 8 submits that in


::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2021                     ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2021 23:24:54 :::
                                                                     wp13432.17
                                    -2-

 terms of Schedule E of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966,

 alternate efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner by way of

 filing appeal before the Deputy Director of Land Records.



 4.       Mr. Patil h/f Mr. P.B. Vikhe Patil, learned counsel for

 respondent Nos. 1 and 2 also submits that alternate efficacious

 remedy is available to the petitioner by filing appeal before the

 Deputy Director of Land Records.           Learned counsel for the

 respondents submits that otherwise also in view of the record

 available before the District Superintendent of Land Records, it is

 clear that after consolidation, the land admeasuring 2 acres 37

 gunthas is reduced from the holding of land of respondent Nos. 1 and

 2.      The District Superintendent of Land Records, has rightly

 considered the same and thus, condoned the delay caused in filing

 appeal.



 5.       Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the

 order dated 27.2.2017 passed by this Court (Coram: S.B. Shukre, J.)

 in writ petition No. 10628 of 2016 and submits that in the identical

 situation the matter was remanded to the District Superintendent of

 Land Records, for considering the delay condonation application

 afresh in accordance with law, keeping in view the applicable

 judgments.



 6.       It appears that the District Superintendent of Land Records,

::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2021                 ::: Downloaded on - 17/03/2021 23:24:54 :::
                                                                         wp13432.17
                                        -3-

 has condoned the inordinate delay of 54 years. There is no whisper

 in the order as to why the delay deserves to be condoned and as to

 whether the case is made out for condonation of such inordinate

 delay caused in filing the appeal. Though learned A.G.P. and the

 counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have vehemently

 submitted about availability of alternate efficacious remedy, however,

 in the peculiar facts of the present case, this court is left with no other

 way but to remand the matter to the District Superintendent of Land

 Records, Ahmednagar for considering the delay condonation

 application afresh.           It would be a futile exercise to direct the

 petitioners to avail the alternate efficacious remedy.               Hence, the

 following order:-



                                     ORDER

I. The writ petition is hereby partly allowed.

II. The impugned order dated 16.6.2017 is hereby quashed and

set aside.

III. The matter is remanded to the learned District Superintendent

of Land Records, Ahmednagar with following directions:-

a) Restore the application seeking condonation of delay bearing No. 839 of 2016 to its original number.

wp13432.17

b) The District Superintendent of Land Records, Ahmednagar to decide the said application afresh in accordance with law by giving opportunity of being heard to both sides.

c) The parties shall appear before the District Superintendent of Land Records, Ahmednagar on 31.03.2021.

d) The District Superintendent of Land Records, Ahmednagar shall decide the application seeking condonation of delay afresh within 03 (three) months from the date of appearance of the parties.

IV. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

( V. K. JADHAV, J.)

rlj/