Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 224 days in filing of this revision petition.  An application praying for condonation of the said delay has been filed.   Explanation furnishing for the said delay is that; the copy of order dated 11.04.2012, was received at the Branch office Vijayawada, on receipt of the order, it was sent to the Zonal Office, Bangalore on 11/8/2012 for further action and was thereafter forwarded to the Head Office at Pune and put up with the Manager (law) in middle of September 2012 who after reading the same requisitioned for the office case file; after consultation with the counsel Sh.Garikkamukku Anand, Advocate it was decided that restoration application cannot be filed and a revision is maintainable before this Hon’ble Commission; the entire case papers of the said case was procured from Vijayawada Advocate Mr. Rajesh Gundapu on 16/10/2012 and the entire file was sent to the Chandigarh Zonal Office for necessary action and thereafter to the Office at Delhi; the said file was delivered to the counsel Sh.Pankul Nagpal, Advocate on 29^th October 2012, who required the proceedings before the State Commission and the District Forum, when the said counsel again asked for the entire case file he was informed that the entire file already had been handed over to him and no other document is available with the Petitioner company. However, a scanned copy of the entire file was thereafter forwarded to him, who drafted the present Revision petition and forwarded the same approval to the Petitioner Company, who further sent it to head Office for approval; the revision petition was approved and sent to the Counsel on 31^st January 2013, and when the counsel sent the same for filing before this Hon’ble Commission it transpired that there had been a delay in filing the petition; thereafter the counsel prepared the application seeking condonation of delay and sent the same for approval to the Petitioner Company who checked the facts and approved the same on 22^nd February 2013 and the revision petition and the application has been received after signatures on 27 February 2013 and the same is being filed immediately.

               To say the least, the explanation is utterly vague.  The only explanation is movement of file from one table to another.  The casualness with which the file was preceded is manifest in the aforesaid explanation.  We are unable to understand as to why it took more than a month’s time in putting up the impugned order to the Manager (Law) and almost 3 months in drafting of the revision petition by the counsel.  Thereafter, it took nearly a month to draft and file application for condonation of delay.

               We are not satisfied with the aforesaid explanation given for condonation of delay.  Bearing in mind the observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anshul Aggarwal vs. New Okhla Industrial  Development  Authority – (2011) 14 SCC 578,  we decline to condone the inodinate delay of 224 days in filing of this appeal.  Consequently, the same is dismissed on the ground of limitation.