1. Through this application, delay of 212 days in filing of the appeal has been sought to be condoned on account of procedural delay.
2. However, we are not satisfied that the reason shown, as the appellant, a Public Sector Undertaking which has sufficient infrastructure, could have taken steps for filing this appeal in time. The appellant-organization does not seems to be serious in prosecuting this litigation and, therefore, did not choose to file an appeal in time against the impugned judgment and order.
3. Thus there does not appear to be sufficient reason to condone the delay which occurred due to the laches on the part of the appellants.
4. In spite of delay in filing the appeal, we permitted the counsel for the appellants to address us on the merit of the appeal so as to determine as to whether the dismissal of the appeal on the ground of delay can cause grave injustice or prejudice to the appellant-company.
5. On hearing the counsel for the appellants on the merit of the case, we have noticed that the respondent had filed a writ application before the learned Single Judge for payment of his salary for the period during which he had wrongly been made to superannuate on the ground of incorrect entry of the date of birth being recorded in the service record which was interfered with by this Court, vide W.P.(S) No. 5294 of 2003 filed by the petitioner-respondent herein directing the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner-respondent. In the process of the consideration, age of the petitioner-respondent was ordered to be assessed by the Medical Board. The medical report was given in favour of the respondent-employee. Consequently, he succeeded in establishing his plea that he had been wrongly superannuated. The respondent-employee, therefore, had to be reinstated in service but the appellant-Management of the Bharat Coking Coal Limited refused to pay his salary for the period during which he was out of service due to his illegal superannuation. Since the respondent herein was not paid his salary for the period of his illegal superannuation which was between 31.7.2003 to 7.4.2004, he filed a writ petition, vide W.P.(S) No. 6538 of 2005 before the learned Single Judge for payment of his salary and the learned Single Judge was pleased to hold that the superannuation of the petitioner-respondent herein was illegal but he was pressurized by the appellant-Management of the Bharat Coking Coal Limited to forgo his salary for the aforesaid period when he was allowed to superannuate illegally. Learned Single Judge therefore, allowed the writ petition and directed the appellant herein to pay the salary for the period during which he was compelled not to discharge his duties in the appellants'' organization.
6. As already stated, the appellant M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited did not prefer any appeal in time rather after 212 days of the expiry of the period of limitation Management woke up from its slumber and preferred the instant appeal which is devoid of any merit as the respondent having succeeded in establishing his plea that he had been illegally superannuated, he could not have been compelled by the appellant-Management of the Bharat Coking Coal Limited to forgo his salary. In fact, the appellant-Management also did not appear to be serious in prosecuting this matter which is obvious from the fact that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 212 days which has not been explained at all. Still we consider it just and appropriate to examine the merit of the appeal so as to infer whether any grave injustice would be caused to the appellant organization in case the appeal is dismissed merely on the ground of limitation. We are satisfied that on the merit also the appellant does have any case, so as to be interfered with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Hence, this appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay as also on the merit.
