Sufficient cause for delay was found where curfew and office disruption explained the late filing of an appeal.

A 41-day delay in filing an appeal was treated as sufficiently explained where official records showed curfew in Meerut during the relevant period and departmental material confirmed disruption of office functioning and preparation of the appeal. The supporting certificate from the Additional District Magistrate, together with the affected local conditions, was accepted as sufficient cause for the delay, and the disruption in the area was also taken as a matter of judicial notice. On that basis, the delay was condoned and the application was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a delay of 41 days in filing the appeal should be condoned on the basis of the curfew, disruption of office functioning, and supporting official records.

Analysis: The delay was supported by a certificate of the Additional District Magistrate showing curfew in Meerut for the relevant period, along with departmental records indicating disruption in the office work and preparation of the appeal. The circumstances were treated as sufficient cause for the delay, and the disruption in the affected area was also a matter of judicial notice.

Conclusion: The delay was condoned and the application was allowed.

---