Condonation of delay rejected where no sufficient cause explained a belated appeal, and the writ challenge failed.

A writ challenge to the refusal to condone delay in filing an appeal failed because the explanation for filing the appeal after about eleven months and twenty-eight days was found inadequate. The record did not show sufficient cause for the belated filing, and the Appellate Authority's refusal to condone delay was held to disclose no error. The rejection of condonation was therefore upheld, leaving the petition unsuccessful.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner's challenge could succeed despite rejection of the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority.

Analysis: The application for condonation of delay disclosed no reasonable explanation for filing the appeal after about eleven months and twenty-eight days. The reasons offered were found inadequate, and the record did not establish sufficient cause for the belated filing. The Court therefore found no error in the Appellate Authority's refusal to condone the delay.

Conclusion: The rejection of condonation of delay was upheld, and the writ petition failed.

---