Continuation Sheet . Sr. No. Orders 21.07.2005 L,Ir A.K. Bhardwaj for the Petitioner. h{r P.M. Mittal for tJre Respondent. There is a delay of 175 days in filing tlris petiflon and rnore ftan 1000 days delay in nefiling of the papers. CMs 1'4Jl55l2A04 and l44;SGlZ1g4 pray for condonation of the said delay. Insofar as the delay in filing is concerned, the only reason advanced in the application by the petitioner is that the same has occurred on accolmt of frequent of the officers dealing wittt the rnatters and the resultant ornmunication gnp between the department and the corursel appearing for it. The application does noL however, set out any particulars or details of the officers who were posted during the relevant period or the number of transfers that have taken place during the interregnum. While it is true that in matters of condonation of detay, the court takes a Uberal view, in cases where pubic functionaries are involv'ed, on account of the impersonal nature of its functioning, yet the rrinimurr which the appticant must do is to assert the facts on tlre basis of which the detay ean be held to be justified or explainable. The applications in the present case clearly fall short of the said requirernent and do not make out any cogent reason for the inordinate delay that oceured in the filing and refiling of the paperc. V a Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified V lfe, accordinElfr dismiss CM Nos. t4Jr55l2004hnda14456/2004 consequently the referrence application shall consequently stand as barred by lirnitation. 21, 2005 Id- n<- t'*1tT*'t