Tribunal grants appeal extension for health reasons, stresses Natural Justice principles.

The Tribunal accepted the appellant's reasons for seeking condonation of a 25-day delay in filing the appeal due to health grounds, considering the appellant's age and health issues. The Tribunal allowed the stay application and remanded the appeal to the Commissioner for a decision on merits within four months, emphasizing adherence to the Principles of Natural Justice. The decision highlighted the importance of a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach in condoning delays based on health reasons, citing previous judgments and the need for a thorough consideration of the case within a specified timeframe.

---

---

Issues:
Delay in filing appeal, condonation of delay based on health grounds, application for stay, remand for decision on merits.

Delay in filing appeal:
The appellant, a 71-year-old individual suffering from various ailments, appealed against the Commissioner's decision not to condone a 25-day delay in filing the appeal. The appellant argued that the Commissioner had the power to condone delays up to 60 days and cited health reasons for the delay, supported by an affidavit. The Tribunal considered the submissions and referred to previous judgments emphasizing the acceptability of health grounds for condonation of delay. The Tribunal noted that a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach should be taken in such matters. Ultimately, the Tribunal accepted the appellant's reasons for seeking condonation of delay, highlighting the appellant's age and health issues, and allowed the stay application. The appeal was remanded to the Commissioner to decide the case on merits within four months, following the Principles of Natural Justice.

Condonation of delay based on health grounds:
The Tribunal analyzed previous judgments, including those by the Apex Court, to establish the acceptability of health reasons as a valid cause for condonation of delay. Citing the case of State of Nagaland v. Lipok Ao, the Tribunal emphasized the need for a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach in such matters. Considering the appellant's age, health condition, and the affidavit provided, the Tribunal concluded that the delay of 25 days should have been condoned by the Commissioner. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of taking a pragmatic view in the interest of justice and accepted the reasons presented by the appellant for seeking condonation of the delay.

Application for stay:
The Tribunal addressed the stay application and the appeal simultaneously, noting that the issue was straightforward. After allowing the stay application due to the condonation of the delay in filing the appeal, the Tribunal remanded the case to the Commissioner for a decision on merits within a specified timeframe. The Tribunal's decision to allow the stay application was based on the acceptance of the reasons provided by the appellant for the delay and the need for a just and pragmatic approach in such cases.

Remand for decision on merits:
Following the acceptance of the appellant's reasons for seeking condonation of delay and the allowance of the stay application, the Tribunal remanded the appeal to the Commissioner for a decision on merits. The Commissioner was instructed to decide the case within four months from the receipt of the Tribunal's order, emphasizing the adherence to the Principles of Natural Justice in the decision-making process. The remand was a result of the Tribunal's decision to uphold the appellant's plea for condonation of the delay and ensure a thorough consideration of the case on its merits within a specified timeframe.

---