UNION OF INDIA Vs. H THAUAMVELA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P.N. Choudhury, learned Addl. CGSC for the applicants. Also heard Mr. Michael Zothankhuma, learned counsel for the Respondents.

(2.) This is an application preferred by the Union of India, supported by an affidavit for condoning the delay of 21 days in preferring the belated appeal. Explaining the delay of 21 days, the applicants have made the following contentions in paragraph 2 of this Misc. case :

(3.) After going through the above contents, stated to be the sufficient cause and/or adequate explanation for condonation of delay, 1 am not impressed a wee bit to record the Same as a satisfactory, reasonable or even an appropriate explanation for seeking the condonation of delay though it is for only 21 days. The explanation so put forward patently reflects the casual and callous approach on the part of the applicants towards the delay matter. Such lapses of delay, 1 am sorry to say, are not uncommon in the appeals/Petitions preferred by the Union of India. It is the general experience that most of the appeals/Petitions filed by the State/Union of India are quite often barred by time and the application for condonation of delay is made in a most casual and routine manner without indicating the facts which would constitute sufficient cause to permit condonation of delay in accordance with law. Here the delay is-only of 21 days. But the question is not with the days. What is needed to be looked into is the approach, and attitude of the applicants towards the explanation of delay and what cogent and plausible ground they intend to advance to explain such delay. There is nothing in the application for condonation of delay to indicate the factual position which would give rise to sufficient cause for such condonation.