Condonation of delay requires proof of sufficient cause; unexplained delay must be reconsidered after giving an opportunity to explain.

An order condoning delay in filing an enhancement petition cannot stand where the delay is left unexplained and the authority has substituted its own reasons instead of examining whether sufficient cause was shown. The proper course is to afford the applicant an opportunity to file an additional affidavit explaining the delay and to reconsider condonation on that basis. Here, the delay of 193 days had not been explained by the concerned party, so the condonation order was set aside and the matter remitted to the Tribunal for fresh decision after further explanation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order condoning delay in filing the enhancement petition could be sustained when the delay remained unexplained, and whether the matter required remand for a fresh decision after affording an opportunity to explain the delay.

Analysis: The delay of 193 days in filing the enhancement petition was not explained by the party concerned. The Tribunal had supplied its own reasons for condoning the delay instead of testing whether sufficient cause had been shown by the applicant. In such a situation, the proper course was to give the respondent an opportunity to place an additional affidavit explaining the delay and to have the issue decided afresh on that basis.

Conclusion: The order condoning delay was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration after the respondent filed an additional affidavit explaining the delay.

---