Appeal restoration for merits when delay rejection was unsustainable despite confirmed deposit and notification-based relaxation.

Rejection of an appeal for alleged delay was unsustainable where the requisite deposit had been confirmed and the appeal had been filed within the relaxation granted by the relevant notification. The court held that the appeal should not have been dismissed on delay grounds and directed that it be restored to the appellate file and numbered for disposal on merits. The impugned rejection order was quashed, and the appeal was restored for expeditious hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order rejecting the appeal on the ground of delay was liable to be set aside and the appeal restored for consideration on merits.

Analysis: The order records that the requisite deposit stood confirmed and that the appeal had been filed within the relaxation granted by the notification referred to in the earlier order. In that view, the rejection of the appeal on a purported delay could not be sustained. The proper course was to restore the appeal to the appellate file and number so that it could be heard and decided on merits.

Conclusion: The impugned rejection order was quashed, and the appeal was restored for expeditious disposal on merits. The result is in favour of the petitioner.

---