Failure to record reasons for condoning inordinate unexplained delay violates natural justice; constitutes jurisdictional error warranting writ interference under Article 226 despite alternate remedy, protecting vested rights.

JUDGEMENT :

KAMAL KHATA, J.

1. By the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner challenges the Order dated 8th April 2024 ("impugned Order") passed by the Additional Commissioner Konkan Division ("Respondent No. 4") in Appeal /DESK/LND/59/2023 ("the Appeal") along with the Application for condonation of delay ("delay application") whereby the Respondent No. 4 condoned delay of 13 years and 07 months and 21 days in filing an Appeal.

Brief Facts

2. Nanubhai Industries Private Limited (Nirlon Limited) – the Petitioner originally acquired the following piece and parcel of lands (“said property”) by virtue of a Sanad document / Agreement dated 18^th August 1962.

As and by way of abundant precaution, by a registered indenture dated 22^nd September 1964 the Petitioner obtained confirmation from the owner Sitaram Narayan Desai (“Sitaram”), the father of Respondent No.1 for valuable consideration.

3. Thereafter, by a registered indenture dated 31st March 1965, the Petitioner purchased from the Respondent no.1’s father Sitaram Narayan Desai the following additional properties for valuable consideration.

4. Accordingly, the Petitioner became a lawful owner of various plots of lands on either side of the two villages i.e. Village Pahadi and Village Goregaon.

5. Nearly forty-four years later, pursuant to a letter dated 26th October 2009, issued by the Collector ("Respondent No. 2"), area correction proceedings were initiated by the City Survey Authorities in respect of the lands at Malad, Pahadi Goregaon, and Goregaon.

6. Pursuant to the survey, the Respondent No. 2 passed an Order dated 2nd March 2010, ("Area Correction Order") thereby effecting necessary area corrections and mutation entries in the revenue records reflecting the ownership of the Petitioners under Sections 106 and 135 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (“MLRC”).

7. The Correction Order caused a gap between the two villages admeasuring approximately 1728.5 sq. mtrs. For ease of reference, the scanned copies of coloured sketch of the plans of the said properties are annexed to this Judgment as Plan ‘X’ and ‘X-1’.

8. The plan ‘X’ records the various land parcels purchased by the Petitioner coloured in green, yellow and blue shades. The thick yellow line seen in the center of plan ‘X’ represents the boundary depicting the gap that has arisen between the Village Pahadi, Goregaon and Village Goregaon in view of the Correction Order dated 2^nd March, 2010 that for identification is encircled in blue color in the plan ‘X-1’.

9. The Petitioner has been enjoying peaceful and uninterrupted possession of the said lands over four decades and has undertaken substantial development on the said lands and even created third-party rights.

10. In the year 2023, the Respondent No. 1, the daughter of the erstwhile owner Sitaram, claiming some right, title, or interest in the said lands, preferred an Appeal along with the delay application seeking delay of 13 years, 07 months, and 21 days before the Respondent No. 4, challenging the Area Correction Order dated 2nd March 2010.

11. By