{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2085 OF 1999 WITH FIRST APPEAL STAMP NO.11499 OF 1998 The State of Maharashtra APPLICANT VERSUS Bhaurao Fakira Patil (Dead) through LRs RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.V.B.Ghatge, AGP for applicant / State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE : 5th September 2009 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant / State has prayed for condonation of 279 days delay in filing appeal challenging the judgment and award passed by reference Court. 2. The applicant has contended that the delay has been caused due to official and administrative difficulties as well as heavy work load. 3. Division Bench of this Court in “State of Maharashtra {2} V/s Vithu Kalya Govari” reported in 2008 (6) Mh.L.J. 239 has observed that the application for condonation of delay must disclose sufficient and satisfactory reasons. Official hassles cannot be said to be a ground for condonation of delay. 4. Perusal of application does not disclose sufficient and satisfactory grounds for condonation of delay. In the light of judgment of the Division Bench and considering the delay which is not sufficiently and satisfactorily explained, the civil application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed summarily with no order as to costs. 5. As the civil application for condonation of delay is dismissed the accompanying first appeal does not survive and hence stands rejected. The applicant is entitled for refund of court fees as per rules. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/ca2085-99