The State Of Maharashtra Through ... vs Gajanan Shankar Patil And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 3761 Bom

          Digitally signed
          by GAURI
GAURI     AMIT
AMIT
                                                        1/3                  6.IA-1542-2021.doc
          GAEKWAD
GAEKWAD   Date:
          2023.04.19
          10:46:03 +0530        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                       INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1542 OF 2021
                                                       WITH
                                       INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1543 OF 2021
                                                         IN
                                         FIRST APPEAL (L) NO.99134 OF 2020

              The State of Maharashtra                   .....Applicant
                        Vs.
              Gajanan Shankar Patil and Ors.         .....Respondents
                                                    ----
              Mr. A.R. Patil, AGP for State - applicant.
              None for respondents.
                                                    ----
                                                     CORAM : K. R. SHRIRAM &
                                                              RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATED : 17th APRIL 2023

P.C. :

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1542 OF 2021

1 This is an application for condonatnion of delay of 338 days in

filing the appeal. Mr. Patil states that in paragraph 2 of the interim

application, there is an explanation for the delay. Mr. Patil states that the

certified copy was applied for on 10th November 2017 but it was ready only

on 19th October 2019. Since we could not accept on the face of the affidavit

that it took almost two years for the certified copy to be ready, we asked

Mr. Patil to show the application for certified copy. At page 17 is the noting

by the Court at Alibaug. It says applicant applied for certified copy on

10th November 2017 but removed the office objections only on 14 th October

2019, almost two years after filing the application. There is no explanation

Gauri Gaekwad

2/3 6.IA-1542-2021.doc

whatsoever forthcoming which can be accepted. Mr. Patil states that as a

routine they file lot of applications but that is not the explanation for non

removal of office objections. Certainly this period from 10 th November 2017

to 14th October 2019 cannot be excluded and this itself is in excess of

338 days. When we asked Mr. Patil to show any judgment to the effect that

even this period should be excluded, Mr. Patil states that there is no such

judgment. This delay also will go against applicant.

2 In the chronology at paragraph 2 of the interim application, it

is stated that on 19th October 2019 certified copies were ready but applicant

does not know when the office of the District Government Pleader received

the certified copies. It is also stated that the last date for filing the appeal

expired on 16th January 2020 which for reasons as noted above is not

correct. Even then there is no explanation between 16 th January 2020 and

14th August 2020 when the Solicitor to Government issued resolution for

filing the appeal. We also find that the chronology of dates and events is

mixed up in as much as serial no.7 says 16 th January 2020, serial no.8 says

14th August 2020, serial no.9 says 25th March 2020 to 14th April 2020, serial

no.10 says 15th April 2020 to 3rd May 2020 and serial no.13 says 1 st June

2020 to 30th September 2020. Therefore, there appears to be some error in

serial no.8 which means that applicant has not bothered to check the

application. Even the Additional Government Pleader through whom it has

been filed has not bothered to check the dates. We have to note that the

Gauri Gaekwad

3/3 6.IA-1542-2021.doc

same Ashwini Shivaji Patil, Deputy Collector, has filed a similar application

with errors that came to our notice last week in another interim application.

It is rather unfortunate that nobody bothers to read the application which is

filed under oath. The verification states " I, ................. do hereby state on

solemn affirmation that whatever stated hereinabove is true to my own

knowledge and information gathered from the office which I believe to be

true and correct". If it was really true, then these errors would not have

crept in.

3 Ofcourse Mr. Patil tried to justify that these are all routine

matters which are applied for and done, which we find is very difficult to

accept. If it was so simple and routine, there was no need to file any

application for condonation of delay.

4 Mr. Patil requests for an opportunity to file a further affidavit to

explain these errors and gaps and also to explain why for almost two years

the office objections were not removed. This affidavit shall be filed by the

said Ashwini Shivaji Patil even if she is no more the Deputy Collector of the

concerned district. The affidavit shall be filed and copy served on

respondents by 27th April 2023.

5               Stand over to 2nd May 2023.




(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)                                     (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.)




Gauri Gaekwad