1 WP No.5276/10 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5276 of 2010 Dadaso R. Jagtap ... Petitioner versus Enquiry Officer Panchayat Samiti Satara and others ... Respondents ... Mr. A.P. Kulkarni for the petitioner. Mr. S.R.Nargolkar AGP for respondent nos.3 and 4. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND N.D.DESHPANDE, JJ DATED : 11th October 2010 P.C. 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard forthwith by consent of the parties. 2. The petitioner was in the service of Zilla Parishad, Satara. He was compulsorily retired from the service of Zilla Parishad by order dated 4th August 2006. Feeling aggrieved by that order, petitioner preferred the appeal before the State Government. It appears that there was delay in filing that appeal. Petitioner did not file an application for condonation 2 WP No.5276/10 of delay. The State Government therefore, by order dated 6th December 2008 dismissed the appeal as it was barred by limitation. 3. It is clear from the order that the State Government has the power to condone the delay in filing the appeal. In our opinion, if according to the State Government there was delay in filing the appeal, the State Government should have intimated to the petitioner that unless he files an application for condonation of delay, his appeal cannot be entertained. In our opinion, therefore, following order would meet the ends of justice. In case the petitioner files an application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal within a period of four weeks from today, State Government shall consider that application after giving notice to the Zilla Parishad in accordance with law. In case the State Government is satisfied that there is sufficient cause shown for condonation of delay, the State Government may condone the delay and hear the appeal on merits. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J) (N.D.DESHPANDE,J)