Condonation of delay denied where prolonged inaction, suppression of facts, and unanswered office objections showed negligent conduct.

Inordinate and unexplained delay in filing a review petition was not condoned where the petitioner left office objections unattended for more than three years and filed affidavits containing misstatements and suppression of material facts. The Court noted that a liberal approach to delay cannot excuse negligent, untruthful, or cavalier conduct, even when the applicant is the Government. Because no satisfactory explanation was offered for the delay or the prolonged inaction, condonation was refused and the review petition was dismissed with costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether the review petitioner was entitled to condonation of delay in filing the review petition and whether the prolonged failure to remove office objections, coupled with incorrect and suppressed facts in affidavits, justified dismissal.

Analysis: The review petition was lodged with a delay and remained unnumbered for more than three years because the office objections were not removed. The affidavits filed on behalf of the review petitioner did not furnish a satisfactory explanation for the delay or for the prolonged inaction, and the Court found material misstatements and suppression of relevant facts. Although a liberal approach is generally adopted in matters of delay, such latitude is not available where the delay is inordinate and the conduct of the applicant shows negligence and lack of candour. The Court held that the Government had acted in a cavalier manner and had failed to comply with the earlier direction to explain the delay properly.

Conclusion: The application for condonation of delay was rejected and the review petition was dismissed, with costs.

Final Conclusion: The Court declined to excuse the unexplained and prolonged delay and refused to entertain the review, bringing the proceedings to an end against the review petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Inordinate and unexplained delay, especially when accompanied by suppression of facts and failure to cure office objections, is not entitled to condonation merely because the applicant is the Government; liberal treatment does not extend to negligent and untruthful conduct.

---