1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8386 OF 2010 Hanumant s/o. Keshav Khedkar Age 39 yrs., Occu. Nil., R/o. Tintarwani, Tq. Shirud, Dist. Beed. ....Petitioner. Versus 1. The Lommanya Tilak College, Wadvani, Through it's Secretary. 2. The Principal, Lomanya Tilak College, Wadvani. 3. The Education Officer,(Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Beed. 4. The Rashtriya Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Beed, through it's Secretary, Beed. ....Respondents. Mrs. A.D. Rakh, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. D.R. Kale, A.G.P. for respondent No. 3. Mr. V.R. Sonwalkar, Advocate for respondent No. 4. CORAM : A.A.SAYED, J. DATED : 16th December, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 19.7.2010 of the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad, whereby the application of the petitioner for condonation of delay in filing the appeal came to be rejected. 2 3. It is noted that the delay is of 60 days and the Tribunal did not accept the explanation given by the petitioner that in view of the assurances given by the Management, the petitioner did not approach the Tribunal in time. The Tribunal has observed that the person who slept over his rights is not entitled to claim any relief from the Court. 4. Having gone through the impugned order, in my view, the Tribunal's approach is very pedantic. It is well settled that the Courts would take a liberal approach in the matters of condonation of delay in filing an appeal particularly when the delay is neither malafide nor intentional. The delay in the present case is not such that could not have been condoned. Though the reason given for condonation of delay is not entirely satisfactory, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to allow the petition. 5. In the circumstances, the petition succeeds. The impugned order dated 19.7.2010 is quashed and set aside and the application of the petitioner for condonation of delay shall be deemed to have been accepted. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause "B". No order as to costs. [ A. A. SAYED, J. ] ssc/wp8386.10