AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anil Kumar Srivastava, Chairperson
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
Matter is taken up in the second call. None appears to represent the Appellants while Learned Counsel for Respondent is present.
An e-mail message is received from Mr. Sanjay Mitra, Learned Counsel, to the effect that he is an outstation Counsel residing at Guwahati and due to auspicious occasion of local harvest festival, i.e. Magh Vihu, he will not be able to attend the hearing and a request for adjournment is made.
Record shows that continuously Appellants are seeking adjournment on one ground or the other. On the last occasion, i.e. on the 14th of November, 2022, request for adjournment was received through e-mail on the ground of illness of the Learned Counsel. Such request was conceded to with but a specific direction was made to the effect that if any further adjournment is sought, the matter shall be disposed of on the date fixed. In spite of a specific order, again an adjournment is sought for on the ground of Vihu festival. This cannot be a ground for adjournment. Festival can be a ground for enjoyment but cannot be a ground for adjournment.
In view of the specific direction given in the order dated 14th November, 2022, I am not inclined to grant any adjournment. The prayer for adjournment is accordingly declined.
Since none is present to press the applications for condonation of delay as well as the application for waiver, both the applications are dismissed in default.
Accordingly, the appeal is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.
The appeal, being Diary No. 116 of 2019, is dismissed as time barred and not maintainable.
Copy of the order be supplied to Appellant and the Respondents and a copy be also forwarded to the concerned DRT.
File be consigned to Record room.