C482 225/2002 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. (Delay Cond. Appl. 1042/2010, Restoration Appl.796/2010) Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. MA Khan, Brief Holder for the State. There is delay of 999 days in moving the present restoration application, which has been filed seeking recall of the order dated 19.11.2007 passed by this Court whereby the present petition was dismissed for want of prosecution. Learned Counsel for the applicants stated that he could not mark the case in the cause list on the date fixed. But I do not find any substance in this argument of learned Counsel as earlier the case of the applicants was being represented by Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate and not by the present Counsel and there is no affidavit of Mr. Vinod Sharma that he could not mark the case on the last date. Furthermorre, the aforesaid order dated 19.11.2007 came in the knowledge of the applicants on 5.12.2007 when the certified copy of this order was issued which is apparent from the noting of the office made in the ordersheet. But the present restoration application could be filed only on 14.9.2010 before this Court and this delay is not explained by showing the sufficient cause. Thus, the applicants had full knowledge of the developments in the case and even then, there is delay of 999 days in moving present restoration application and this delay has to be explained on day-to-day basis. But as discussed above, the delay has not been explained by showing the sufficient cause. Therefore, I am not inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay condonation application is dismissed. Consequently, restoration application also stands dismissed. (D.V., J.) 30.9.2010 Prabodh