Disposed

V.I.D.C., Thr. Executive Engineer, Amravati Project Construction Division, Amravati v. Pratibhabai Janardhan Mohad and Others

Bombay HC11 Oct 2023CAF/2421/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order condones 65-day delay in filing appeal by a public undertaking. Court imposes condition to plant 25 trees or pay Rs. 10,000. Appeal admitted for registration.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 65 days is condoned on condition that appellant plants 25 trees or pays Rs. 10,000; appeal is to be registered.

What the court decided

V.I.D.C., Thr. Executive Engineer, Amravati… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-NAG:15093

¶2

1 36.caf.2421.2023

¶3

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

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION (CAF) NO. 2421 OF 2023 IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 2715 OF 2023

¶5

Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, Amravati VS. Shri Pratibha Janardhan Mohod and others

¶6

_______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.

¶7

Ms Ashwini Athalye Advocate for the appellant Mr Paras Rathi, Adv, h/f. Mr H. J. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No.1 Ms Mrunal Naik, AGP for the State/respondent Nos 2 and 3

¶8

CORAM : G.A. SANAP, J. DATE : OCTOBER 11, 2023.

¶9

Heard.

¶10

This is an application for condonation of 65 days

¶11

delay caused in filing appeal against the impugned judgment and award dated 30.06.2022.

¶12

The reasons for delay have been set out in the application. It is stated that due to administrative procedural delay, the appeal could not be filed within time. It is further stated that there was lack of communication between the officials. The opinion of the superiors was required for filing the appeal. By the time the opinion was received, the period of limitation was over.

¶13

Learned holding Advocate for respondent No.1 and learned AGP for respondent Nos. 2 and 3/State submit

¶14

2 36.caf.2421.2023

¶15

that Court may pass an appropriate order.

¶16

In view of the reasons stated in the application, I am of the view that a case is made out to condone the delay subject to certain conditions. The appellant is an acquiring body. In my view, in such cases, saddling the public undertaking only with cost, may not serve larger public interest. In such cases, other options need to be explored and made available to the party. Issuing direction to the public undertaking or other Government bodies to plant particular number of trees in each case, could be the best available option. Plantation of trees would be beneficial to one and all. In my view, therefore, by way of a condition for condonation of delay, the appellant can be given an option. Accordingly, in this case, delay is condoned. It is subject to condition that the appellant shall plant twenty-five trees or pay cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) and deposit the said cost in this Court. Learned advocate for the appellant shall file a pursis and exercise the option.

¶17

As far as the mechanism for implementation of this direction is concerned, the same shall be identical to the one set out in para Nos. 7 and 9 of the order dated 25.09.2023 passed in CAF No. 130 of 2020. Para Nos. 7 and 9 are extracted below :

¶18

3 36.caf.2421.2023

¶19

“7. Concerned acquiring body, Government office or the appellant, as and when directed to plant trees, shall comply the said order and make a report of the same to the District Forest Officer of the concerned district. The District Forest Officer of the concerned district from Vidarbha Region, on receipt of the report, as above, shall depute a responsible officer to the spot for inspection. The District Forest Officer shall maintain record of the same for two years. The District Forest Officer of the concerned district, after inspection, shall forward the compliance report to the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Nagpur. The Secretary of High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Nagpur shall maintain case-wise record and as and when required, shall place the same before this Court. The Secretary, High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Nagpur can take help of the Secretary of the District Legal Aid Services Authority of the concerned district from Vidarbha Region for the purpose of verification and report.

¶20

The appellant/authority concerned on exercising option of plantation of trees, will be responsible to maintain the planted trees for two years from the date of plantation. The appellant/authority, in all such cases, shall first utilize the land available with it. In case, the land is not available, the concerned appellant/ body/authority shall make request to the in-charge of the Social Forestry Department of the concerned district as well as to the Collector or the Tahsildar of the concerned district/taluka for making the Government land available for plantation. The officer of Social Forestry Department/Collector/Tahsildar shall do the needful as and when such request is received.”

¶21

The concerned party or authority, on exercise of option, shall comply the order as early as possible and in any

¶22

4 36.caf.2421.2023

¶23

case within one month. The Registry shall register the appeal

¶24

on filing pursis by the appellant exercising option.

¶25

In case the appellant exercises the option of plantation of trees, copy of this order be forwarded to the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Nagpur, the District Forest Officer, Amravati for information.

¶26

The application stand disposed of , accordingly. 10. Appeal be registered.

¶27

FIRST APPEAL (st.) NO. 2715 OF 2023

¶28

Heard.

¶29

ADMIT.

¶30

Learned holding Advocate Mr Paras Rathi waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.1.

¶31

Learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3/State.

¶32

Call for record and proceedings.

¶33

Paper book be filed within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of record and proceedings.

¶34

(G. A. SANAP, J.)

¶35

Namrata

V.I.D.C., Thr. Executive Engineer, Amravati Project Construction Division, Amravati v. Pratibhabai Janardhan Mohad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

V.I.D.C., Thr. Executive Engineer, Amravati Project Construction Division, Amravati v. Pratibhabai Janardhan Mohad and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Executive Engineer, Bembla Project, Yavatmal Vs Vinayak Ramchandra Ramteke and Others

The Union of India, General Manager, Central Railway, Mumbai Cst Vs Smt. Meena Wd/O Sitab Kahar and Another

Smt. Manda Wd/O Rajendra @ Raju Lambat and 2 Others Vs Union of India Its General Manager, Central Railway C. S. T., Mumbai

Achyut S/O Ramesh Mahure Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Yavatmal and Others

Narayan S/O Bapurao Tiwade Vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector, Amravati and Others

Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corp. Thr. Exe. Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Washim Vs Parvatibai Mahadeo Lakade and Another