“7. As regards the issue of delay, it is pertinent to note that as per Section 33 of the said Act, the person aggrieved by the order impugned by the competent authority, was required to file appeal within 30 days of the date on which the order was communicated to him, however, if the appellate authority was satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time, the appellate authority may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of 30 days. In the instant case, as transpiring from the impugned order itself, the respondent No. 1 had neither made any application seeking condonation of delay nor had stated in the memo of Appeal as to how he was prevented for 10 years from filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. The Tribunal without assigning any reason, condoned the said delay in absolutely casual manner and entertained the Appeal ignoring the said statutory provisions contained in Section 33 of the said Act. The affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent No.1 in the present petition is also absolutely silent about the cause of such a gross delay. It is well settled proposition of law that delay has to be satisfactorily explained, otherwise the Appeal itself would not be maintainable in the eye of law. In this regard, a very pertinent observations have been made by this Court in the case of K.N. Patel
