IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

906 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7085 OF 2019

IN RAST/16846/2019 WITH CA/7084/2019 IN RAST/

16849/2019

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

VERSUS

PANDHARI MADHAVRAO YEMALWAD AND ANOTHER

Mr. P. S. Patil, AGP for the applicants

Mr. G. J. Karne, Advocate for respondent No. 1.

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &

S. G. DIGE, JJ.

DATED : 19^th April, 2022

PER COURT :-

1.

The State has caused a delay of 387 days in filing

both the review petitions.

2.

Mr. Karne, the learned Advocate, in his usual style

has vehemently opposed these applications. He submits that

the delay is not properly explained. It is more than one year.

Delay should not be condoned on grounds of sympathy. If

there is no merit in the review petition, the delay need not

be condoned. He relies upon the judgments delivered by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition,

Anantnag Vs. Mst. Katiji, AIR 1987 SC 1353 and Esha

Bhattacharjee

Vs.

Managing

Committee

of

ca7085.19.odt

1 of 2

Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649.

3.

Having considered the submissions of the learned

Advocates for the respective sides in the light of the

principles culled out by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Collector,

Land Acquisition, Anantnag

(Supra) and

Esha

Bhattacharjee (Supra), we are of the view that the delay is

neither deliberate nor inordinate. Laches or oblique motives

cannot be attributed to the conduct of the state.

4.

In view of the above, both the civil applications

are allowed. Delay is condoned. The review petitions be

registered.

5.

Mr. Karne, the learned advocate causes an

appearance on behalf of the respondents in the review

application. By consent, list the review petitions on 2^nd May,

2022 in the urgent category.

(S.G. DIGE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

ssp

ca7085.19.odt

2 of 2