A claim under Article 226 of the Constitution must be asserted within a reasonable time; delay renders the claim inadmissible.

JUDGMENT :

ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

1. Heard Mr. Prakash Pawar, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Ms. P. B. Chavan learned AGP for the State.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, filed in the year 2024, the Petitioner claiming to be a Project Affected Person (“PAP”), has assailed the letter dated 05.04.1997 and the Resolution No.89 dated 07.11.2002 passed by the Respondent No.7, denying employment to the Petitioner.

3. Case of the Petitioner:-

a) Agricultural land (Gavthan Land) bearing Survey No.96/3 situated in village Sondeghar, District Ratnagiri. along with the dwelling house, owned by Mr. Laxman Subhanrao Pawar, Petitioner’s father was acquired by the State of Maharashtra, vide Land Acquisition Award dated 06.11.1975, under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for the purpose of “Public Irrigation Scheme of the State Government”.

b) Laxman S. Pawar expired on 19.05.1980 leaving behind his widow Padmavati L. Pawar, one unmarried daughter and two sons including the Petitioner, who all were dependent on the pensionary benefits of Laxman Pawar, who was an ex-service man.

c) Petitioner, to support his mother, sister and brother took up job as a daily wages employee (Grade III) in the Respondent No.7, w.e.f. 01.02.1993.

d) Petitioner was removed from service by the Respondent No.7 in the month of May 1993.

e) On 10.04.1996, Petitioner applied to the Respondent No.6 for a PAP certificate.

f) Respondent No.6, issued Project Affected Certificate bearing No.GB/DESK-2/RPA/1/96 dated 25.10.1996, to the Petitioner.

g) Petitioner was shown at Sr. No.18 of the published by the Respondent No.6.

h) On 26.12.1996 Petitioner submitted an application to the Respondent No.7, seeking appointment on the post of Grade III Clerk, in Open Category under the Project Affected Person Scheme. Request made by the Petitioner was for continuation/reinstatement of his earlier service rendered as daily wage worker.

i) Respondent No.7 by its letter dated 05.04.1997 informed the Petitioner that the vacancy available in the office of the Respondent No.7 was in the category of Other Backward Class and in the event the Petitioner was from the Other Backward Class, Petitioner should submit Caste Certificate within 15 days, failing which the application dated 26.12.1996 would stand rejected.

j) Petitioner relying on the Government Resolution dated 21.01.1980, filed a second application dated 02.05.1997 before the Respondent No.7, seeking appointment as a PAP.

k) Respondent No.7 referred the said application dated 02.05.1997 to the Respondent No.4, for guidance and further action. Respondent No.4 in turn informed the Petitioner that the said application was forwarded to the Respondent No.7 on 05.07.1997.

l) Petitioner sent reminder letter dated 22.07.2002 to the Respondent No.7.

m) Respondent No.7 by its letter dated 07.02.2003 informed the Petitioner that his request dated 22.07.2002 was disposed off.

n) By letter dated 26.03.2003, Respondent No.7 informed the Petitioner to apply to the Respondent No.7 for the reasons for disposal of the Petitioner’s application dated 22.07.2002.

o) Petitioner was furnished copies of the Resolution No.89 dated 07.11.2002 passed by the Respondent No.7 during the period 2002 to 2003 wherein the request for appointment made by the Petitioner was placed before the Respondent No.7, wherein it was resolved that “the Petitioner shall not be taken into Municipal service”.

p) Petitioner has filed the following representations/complaints/letters to the following authorities:-

q) That despite receipt of leg