(1.) There is 162 days delay in filing the appeal and 20 days in refiling the same.
(2.) The judgment and decree under appeal is dated 3.11.2008. As per the averments in the application, L.R., Haryana, after considering the material facts, asked the Department to file this Regular Second Appeal on 31.3.2009. There is no explanation forthcoming as to what all happened between 3.11.2008 to 31.3.2009. The copy of this letter initiated by L.R was received in the office on 9.4.2009. It is thereafter the copies of judgments and decrees were applied and obtained on 11.5.2009. The case was then sent to the office of Advocate General on 15.5.2009. Accordingly, it is stated that sufficient time was taken in obtaining the certified copies and, thus, delay of 162 days took place in filing the Regular Second Appeal. The reason, as stated in the application, would not disclose sufficient cause to condone the delay. The application seeking condonation of 20 days delay in refiling the appeal is not supported by any affidavit. It is stated that this delay occurred due to administrative exigencies in removing the objections.
(3.) Delay in refiling, therefore, is condoned. However, the appeal deserves to be dismissed on the ground of delay in filing the same. The reason which has mainly weighed with the Court not to condone the delay is that the case in the Regular Second Appeal is not meritorious enough as no substantial question of law is involved in this case. Still, the submissions made by the State counsel on merit have been considered and are dealt with hereinafter.