ORDER

1. Notice had been issued in this case both on the question of condonation of delay of 195 days as well as on merits indicating that the matter would be disposed of at the notice stage itself in view of the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Union of India v. R. Swaminathan1.

2. Today, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent vehemently contended that there has been no explanation offered on behalf of the Union of India for condoning the gross delay of 195 days and, therefore, the rights of the respondent accrued pursuant to the judgment of the Tribunal should not be interfered with. In support of this contention, reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court in the case of State of U.P. v. Vinod Prakash Tayal2 where a delay of 149 days had not been condoned by this Court. The question of condonation of delay is a discretion of the court depending upon the circumstances of each case. If a government servant has been conferred certain pecuniary benefits which he is not otherwise entitled to under the rules, non-interference with such an order is a burden on the exchequer and, in view of the aforesaid three-Judge Bench of this Court, while issuin