Maharashtra Vs. Additional Commissioner &
Ors  INSC 423 (12 October 1993)
S. (J) MOHAN, S. (J) BHARUCHA S.P. (J) CITATION: 1994 SCC Supl. (2) 568
1. The State of Maharashtra is the appellant before us.
2 and 3 filed a return under Section 6(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and
Regulation) Act, 1976 in respect of their property they sought inclusion of
additional land as appurtenance in respect of 23 structures at the rate of 500
sq. metres per structure. That request was disallowed. Thereupon, an appeal was
preferred to the first respondent. By an order dated March 25, 1985, he allowed additional land as
appurtenance at the flat rate of 500 sq. metres in respect of the 23 structures
belonging to Respondents 2 and 3. Questioning the correctness of this order the
State filed a writ petition on December 24, 1986.
High Court by the impugned order dismissed the writ petition on the ground of laches
and on the ground that in the interregnums the rights of third parties had come
to be intervened. An appeal was preferred before the Division Bench which was
(1980) 1 SCC 416: AIR 1980 SC 1008 569
this appeal before us it is argued having regard to the ruling in G. Ramegowda
v. S.L.A. Officer1 the High Court ought to have taken a liberal view with
regard to laches as otherwise public interest will suffer. This is the only
argument advanced before us.
do not think the principle laid down in the ruling referred to could be applied
in respect of all cases. In this case we are fully satisfied that the appellant
is guilty of laches. Further, as rightly pointed out by the High Court, the
rights of third parties have intervened.
this appeal will stand dismissed without any order as to costs.