Statutory limitation and writ jurisdiction cannot revive a time-barred appeal when inordinate delay is not convincingly explained.

A writ petition will not succeed against dismissal of a statutory appeal filed beyond the prescribed condonable period where the delay is inordinate and insufficiently explained. The appellate authority found the appeal against the order-in-original was filed after about seventeen months, beyond the limitation window that could be condoned under the governing statute. The petitioner's reliance on family medical difficulties was unsupported by cogent material, so no sufficient cause was shown. The Court reiterated that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used to bypass a statutory bar on condonation or revive a time-barred appeal. The challenge was rejected and no interference was called for.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition can succeed against dismissal of a statutory appeal filed after an inordinate delay beyond the condonable period, and whether such delay was sufficiently explained to warrant interference.

Analysis: The appeal against the order-in-original was filed after about seventeen months. The appellate authority held that the delay exceeded the period that could be condoned under the governing limitation provision. The explanation based on the petitioner's family medical difficulties was found insufficient, as no cogent or convincing material was placed to justify the prolonged delay. The Court applied the settled principle that where the statute prescribes a fixed limitation period with a limited condonable window, delay beyond that window cannot be condoned, and writ jurisdiction cannot be used to circumvent statutory limitation in the absence of sufficient cause.

Conclusion: The challenge to the dismissal of the time-barred appeal was rejected, and no interference was called for under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the statutory appeal was hopelessly delayed and the delay was not satisfactorily explained, leaving no basis for extraordinary relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Inordinate delay in filing a statutory appeal must be properly and convincingly explained, and writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked to revive a time-barred appeal where the statute itself bars condonation beyond the prescribed limit.

---