- (1.) THIS Special Appeal is reported to be time barred by 785 days. The explanation for delay in the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, is not found to be good and sufficient. In the condonation application, it is stated that since the appellant was unemployed and went out of station to earn his livelihood, he could not acquire knowledge about passing of the impugned order.
(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the appellant states that the appellant is not an educated person. He did not come to know, as to when his writ petition was decided, and facing poverty, he could not file the appeal in time.
(3.) WE have perused the order of learned Single Judge. He has affirmed the award of the Labour Court, deciding the reference in favour of the Corporation, with the findings that the domestic enquiry against the appellant was just and proper, and that, serving as a Conductor, he was found carrying 10 passengers unauthorisedly in the bus causing loss to the Corporation. The appellant was serving as a Conductor in the Corporation. He contested the matter in domestic enquiry and in the Labour Court. It cannot therefore be said that he is illiterate, or that he did not have understanding and knowledge of the court proceedings, to consider to condone the delay of 785 days in filing this Special Appeal.;