90 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3290 OF 2026 IN RAST/3824/2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1728 OF 2007 YESHWANT RUPCHAND KOLHE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Kiran M. Nagarkar AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. P. D. Patil ... CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J. Date : 18.08.2026 PER COURT :- 1. Heard. 2. Applicant seeks review of order dated 22.12.2017. The application is presented on 25.01.2026 for condoning delay of 2936 days in filing the Review Application. 3. The Hon’ble Apex Court has reiterated that judicial discretion cannot be stretched to excuse prolonged delays in absence of sufficient cause. As such, an inordinate delay, which is rather unexplained ought not to be condoned. As has been held by 2026:BHC-AUG:37332 90 -2- the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Basawaraj & another Vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (2013) 4 SCC 81: “15. The law on the issue can be summarised to the effect that where a case has been presented in the court beyond limitation, the applicant has to explain the court as to what was the “sufficient cause” which means an adequate and enough reason which prevented him to approach the court within limitation. In case a party is found to be negligent, or for want of bona fide on his part in the facts and circumstances of the case, or found to have not acted diligently or remained inactive, there cannot be a justified ground to condone the delay. No court could be justified in condoning such an inordinate delay by imposing any condition whatsoever. The application is to be decided only within the parameters laid down by this court in regard to the condonation of delay. In case there was no sufficient cause to prevent a litigant to approach the court on time condoning the delay without any justification, putting any condition whatsoever, amounts to passing an order in violation of the statutory provisions and it tantamounts to showing utter disregard to the legislature.” The expression ‘sufficient cause’ implies genuine and compelling reasons. Equity assists those are vigilant and not negligent. 90 -3- 4. Thus, in absence of sufficient reasons, I am of the considered opinion that reasons put-forth by the applicants utterly fail to meet the test of ‘sufficient cause’. 5. Accordingly, the reasons assigned seeking condonation of delay cannot be regarded as plausible. Given the facts and circumstances, the application does not warrant consideration. 6. Resultantly, the Civil Application stands rejected. (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) marathe