Ashok Babarao Bhusale vs The Collector, Yavatmal And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2514 Bom

                                                                                                                                       910. WP 1573 of 2023.odt
                                                                                           1


                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                                                        WRIT PETITION NO.1573/2023

                                        Ashok Babarao Bhusale
                                               ...Versus...
                     The Collector, Yavatmal, Tah. & District - Yavatmal and others
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,                                                                             Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders or directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -

                                                                         Shri V.N. Patre, Advocate for petitioner
                                                                         Ms Tajwar Khan, AGP for respondent no.1 and 3/State



                                                                                        CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATE : 15/03/2023

1. Heard Shri V.N. Patre, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Tajwar Khan, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1 and 3/State.

2. The petition challenges the judgment dated 17/12/2007, passed by the learned Reference Court in Land Acquisition Case No.463/2002, holding that though sufficient opportunity was granted to the petitioner, he failed to adduce evidence in the reference proceedings.

3. Shri V.N. Patre, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the counsel, who was handling the proceedings, had not informed him that the matter was fixed for adducing evidence and therefore, the reference came to be dismissed. He

910. WP 1573 of 2023.odt

submits that for the fault of the counsel, the petitioner should not be penalized.

4. Had the matter rested there perhaps, I would have interfered, however, the record indicates that despite the dismissal of the reference by the judgment dated 17/12/2007, no steps were taken by the petitioner, till 2018, when the petition was filed before this Court on 20/03/2018, which is a period of more than 10 years. The initial award has been passed in the year 2000, which was challenged in the reference. Merely because proceedings have been entrusted to the counsel, that does not absolve the petitioner from his duty to take care and ensure that the proceedings are prosecuted properly, for which purpose, regular visits to the counsel or communication with him is necessary. In the instant case, the abject apathy of the petitioner is evident from the fact that the reference proceedings came to be dismissed on account of his failing to adduce any evidence and even after the dismissal of the reference in the year 2007 till 20/03/2018, no steps were taken. Considering this position, I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned judgment on account of the delay and latches which have occurred. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs.

Digitally signed bySHAILENDRA SUKHADEORAO WADKAR (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) Signing Date:15.03.2023 19:49 Wadkar