Madhya Pradesh High Court
Executive Engineer vs Parma Gond (Dead) Through Lrs. Smt. ... on 30 May, 2024
Author: Avanindra Kumar Singh
Bench: Avanindra Kumar Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
ON THE 30th OF MAY, 2024
FIRST APPEAL No. 414 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
1. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, WATER RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER TEHSIL AND DISTRICT
PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
DISTRICT COLLECTOR PANNA DISTRICT
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI SUBHODH KATHAR - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
AND
1. PARMA GOND S/O BUDHUVA GOND(DECEASED
THROUGH LRS.)
SMT. LALLIBAI W/O LATE PARMA GOND, AGED
ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ITAWAKHAS
TEHSIL AND DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. RAJESH S/O LATE PARMA GOND, AGED ABOUT 33
YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ITAWAKHAS TEHSIL AND
DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. RAMESH S/O LATE PARMA GOND, AGED ABOUT
28 YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ITAWAKHAS TEHSIL AND
DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. AJAY S/O LATE PARMA GOND, AGED ABOUT 16
YEARS, R/O VILLAGE ITAWAKHAS TEHSIL AND
DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
Signature Not Verified
[BY SHRI SANJAY PATEL - ADVOCATE (NOW DECEASED)]
Signed by: RAJESH
MAMTANI
Signing time: 30-05-2024
17:25:34
2
Reserved on : 01.3.2024
Pronounced on : 30.05.2024
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This appeal having been heard and reserved for judgment, coming on
for pronouncement this day, JUSTICE AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
passed the following:
ORDER
This appeal u/s 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 has been filed by
State of Madhya Pradesh and its authorities against order dated 12.9.2022
passed by First Additional District Judge, Panna in MJC No.58/2019 [Parma
Gond and others Vs. Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department]
alongwith an application for condonation of delay being I.A.No.2701/2023.
2 . On 01.3.2024 learned counsel for the parties were heard on
application for condoation of delay and the case was reserved for orders on
aforesaid interlocutory application.
3 . Facts of the case, in brief, are that regarding acquired land in
District Panna. The Land Acquisition Officer by award dated 26.9.2015 passed
in Land Acquisition Case No.13/A-82/year 2013-14 acquired the land bearing
Khasra No.621/17, area 2.428 hectares, situated in village Itawakhas, District
Panna treating the land to be unirrigated one and awarded compensation of
Rs.18,34.475.40 P to the respondents. Against that award reference was made
to the First Additional District Judge, Panna which was numbered as MJC
No.58/2019 and on the basis of government revenue record and assigning
cogent reasons found that land was infact irrigated one and raised the amount of
compensation to Rs.36,68,947/-. Being dissatisfied with the order of First
Additional District Judge, Panna instant appeal has been filed by the State of
Madhya Pradesh alongwith aforesaid application for condonation of delay.
4 . In paragraph 1 of the application for condonation of delay it is
submitted that appeal is time barred by 91 days whereas in paragraph 5 it is
submitted that appeal is barred by 60 days. The reason for delay is mentioned
that after order of reference Court on 12.9.2022 permission from Law
Department was given on 05.1.2023. Thereafter, OIC of the cae was appointed
on 17.1.2023 who obtained copies of the documents from the trial Court and
thereafter filed instant appeal. It is also stated that the case on merit is very
good. The application is supported by an affidavit of Shri Satish Sharma,
Executive Engineer (WRD Division Panna).
5 . The application for condonation of delay was vehemently
opposed by the counsel for the respondent by filing reply. It is stated that no
ground exist for condonation of delay and in the facts and circumstances the
delay cannot be condoned. The application is supported by an affidavit of
Ramesh Gond s/o Late Parma Gond.
6 . Having heard learned counsel for the parties this Court is of
considered opinion that no proper explanation of delay in filing the appeal has
been given. There are no specific dates as to when correspondences were
exchanged between various authorities in this matter. Very causal approach has
been made in stating the reason for delay in filing appeal which cannot be
accepted. Hence, in the considered opinion of this Court delay has not been
properly explained, therefore, prayer for condonation of delay is refused.
I.A.No.2701/2023 stands rejected.
7 . In the result, since delay in preferring appeal has not been
condoned, consequently the First Appeal also stands dismissed without going
into the merits of the case.
(AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE
RM
