- (1.) This appeal is time barred by 167 days, for which there is no satisfactory explanation, except the usual and hackneyed one to the effect that the period of limitation expired since the file travelled from one department to the other before a decision could be taken to file an appeal against the impugned judgment and order, which hardly inspires confidence rather the impression more than once is created that this is a lame excuse only to cover up the non serious attitude of the appellant- State or the Union of India, as the case may be, in filing the appeal.
(2.) Inspite of this huge and unexplained delay, we granted opportunity to the counsel representing the appellant-Union of India to address on the merit of the appeal in order to obviate miscarriage of justice on merit if there be any.
(3.) This appeal has been preferred by the Union of India against the order dated 14.7.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 945 of 2003, by which writ petition was allowed and the impugned order of punishment withholding one annual increment without cumulative effect was quashed and set aside. The said order had been passed after the learned Single Judge noticed that out of the period of 39 days of leave, which was treated as unauthorized absence, in fact, 15 days leave had been duly sanctioned by the authority and the remaining period which was treated as unauthorized absence, was not legally justified as the said period was an extended period of leave, which the respondent has sought as an extension of leave, supported by medical certificate.;