Liberal condonation of delay applies where bona fide administrative process explains the late filing of an appeal.

A liberal approach to condonation of delay applies where a departmental appeal is late because of bona fide internal administrative processing. The Court accepted that the delay arose from consideration by a committee of commissioners and related correspondence constraints, found it neither deliberate nor intentional, and treated the explanation as sufficient cause. It held that the Tribunal should not have rejected the matter at the threshold and set aside the refusal to condone delay. The appeal was restored for decision on merits, leaving the substantive dispute open for adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the departmental appeal ought to have been condoned.

Analysis: The delay was explained as having occurred because the matter required consideration by a Committee of Commissioners and because of internal administrative and correspondence-related constraints. The Court held that the delay was not deliberate or intentional and that the explanation constituted sufficient cause. Relying on the settled approach that matters should not be thrown out at the threshold where a reasonable explanation is shown, the Court found the Tribunal's refusal to condone the delay unsustainable.

Conclusion: The delay ought to have been condoned and the Tribunal's order refusing condonation was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed, the matter was restored before the Tribunal for decision on merits, and the substantive dispute was left open for adjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: Where sufficient cause is shown for a short delay caused by bona fide administrative process, a liberal approach to condonation of delay should be adopted and the appeal should not be defeated at the threshold.

---