Tribunal grants condonation for late appeal filing due to clerk error, emphasizing diligence and prompt action.

The Tribunal allowed the delay condonation application in a case where the appellant filed an appeal 335 days late due to a clerk's failure to promptly deliver the order. Despite the substantial delay, the Tribunal considered the appellant's prompt action upon receiving the order, acknowledging the importance of due diligence in litigation. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant satisfactorily explained the delay, leading to the condonation of the delay and the direction to assign a regular number to the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Delay in filing appeal, condonation of delay

The judgment deals with a delay of 335 days in filing an appeal, leading to a delay condonation application. The appellant received the order on 28.06.2019, but due to the receipt clerk's failure to deliver it to the concerned officer, the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time. The appellant learned about the order through a phone call from the department for dues recovery. Subsequently, the appellant requested the original order from the Commissioner (Appeals) and filed the appeal on 20.08.2020 after receiving the order on 09.07.2020. The appellant's HR Head acknowledged the mistake and took steps to prevent future occurrences. The appellant argued that the delay was due to the clerk's error and should be condoned.

The key issue for consideration was whether the delay in filing the appeal should be excused due to the receipt clerk's failure to deliver the order promptly. The Department opposed the delay condonation, citing the substantial delay of 335 days and relying on previous tribunal decisions emphasizing the importance of due diligence in litigation. The Department argued that the clerk's mistake should not be a valid reason for condoning the delay. The Tribunal examined the facts and previous decisions to determine if the delay was satisfactorily explained.

The Tribunal acknowledged that the appellant's delay was due to the clerk's failure to promptly deliver the order to the concerned officer. However, it noted that once the appellant received the order on 09.07.2020, the appeal was filed within two months on 20.08.2020. The Tribunal considered the appellant's actions in requesting the order and promptly filing the appeal after receiving it. Referring to previous tribunal decisions, the Tribunal highlighted the importance of due diligence in litigation and concluded that the appellant had satisfactorily explained the delay. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the delay condonation application and directed the office to assign a regular number to the appeal.

---

---