HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

No. 2/01.06.2009.

Heard Mr. P. Banerjee, the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant – Petitioner.  It appears that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 511 days.  For its condonation an application has been filed.  From the averments in the application we find that the certified copy of the impugned order was obtained without any delay on the same day and the Ld. Advocate also supplied the certified copy to the concerned Branch Office of the Appellant on 15.11.2007.  Thereafter it has been stated that some concerned Officer being on the verge of retirement did not process the matter.  Till his retirement in March, 2008 there was no progress.  After retirement of the said Officer in second week of April matter was processed and there being no Divisional Officer at that time the further delay occurred.  It is stated acting Divisional Manager joined the Officer in December 2008 and started regularizing the pending job and ultimately the appeal was filed on 04.05.2009.  We have considered the entire application and we are of the opinion that such huge delay has not been explained with any particulars whatsoever.  The vague statement of a particular Officer retiring without mentioning either his name or his designation and his role in the matter of preferring the appeal and without mentioning even thereafter who was in-charge of the Office and how the delay has occurred, such huge delay on such explanation cannot be accepted as a proper explanation.    More so when the Appellant is such big organization having infrastructure.  We are of the opinion that there is gross negligence and laches on the part of the Appellant in proceeding with the matter and in such circumstances the explanation is not found sufficient and the application is dismissed.  The appeal also stands dismissed accordingly.