( 1 ) THERE is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 266 days in filing this appeal.

( 2 ) I have heard the learned Government Counsel Smt. L. Y. Premavathi. She strenuously contended that the said delay may be condoned in filing the appeal by taking liberal view in favour of the appellant considering the variety of activities and responsibilities with which the State is overburdenedly involved. I have applied my mind to the contentions of the learned government Pleader Smt. L. Y. Premavathi.

( 3 ) I have been taken through an affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant sworn to by a Section Officer. No doubt, it is one of the settled principles of law that looking to the variety of activities and responsibilities of the State Government some latitude has to be given to the State in the matter of condonation of delay. But, it does not mean that even if there is no explanation offered and the contents of the affidavit indicate negligence on the part of the officers concerned in dealing with the matter, the delay should be condoned.

( 4 ) THE present appeal has arisen from the judgment and decree or award dated 14th July, 1995, made by the District judge, Belgaum. Ordinarily the period of limitation is 90 days. No doubt, under law if an application for certified copy of the judgment and decree has been made within time, then the applicant is entitled to the period which has been taken in the preparation of the certified copy by the Court.

( 5 ) THE judgment having been delivered on 14-7-1995, application for copy thereof was given on 25th July, 1995. Copy became ready for delivery on 9-8-1995. Thus, it took a period of 16 days in all in the preparation and making the copy ready for delivery to the applicant. Thus the period of 90 days plus 16 days was available to the applicant/appellant to file the appeal under law, and the last date for filing the appeal was on 26th october, 1995. The present appeal has been filed on July 20, 1996. Burden is on the appellant to explain sufficient cause, his conduct and bona fides.

( 6 ) A perusal of the certified copy discloses that the delivery was taken on 25th August, 1995, As I have mentioned earlier, the last date for filing the appeal was on 26-10-1995. But, no appeal had been filed on that day. The learned Additional government Pleader, as stated in paragraph 3 of the affidavit, had forwarded the opinion on 2-9-1995 i. e. almost one month and 24 days period was there with the Government to consider that matter before the limitation could expire. Though the affidavit discloses in its paragraph 3 that a copy of the judgment was forwarded to the Government on 2-9-1995 along with the other papers, it has not been shown how and for what reason the file was not received earlier than 2nd February, 1996. In the affidavit it has only been stated that "the said file was received on 2nd February, 1996" and the case worker of the Department again kept the file for more than two months with him. The case worker had put up the file before Under-Secretary only on 9th april, 1996. No doubt, it has only been stated vaguely that the main file namely LAW 158 LMB 85 was not readily traced in the section. Why it was not readily traceable is not explained. It is nowhere stated in the affidavit that the aforesaid file was missing or it has been lost. If. it was missing what steps were taken to trace out the same. Allegations in this regard in paragraph 3 are vague. It is further stated that "i state that the Under-Secretary reviewed the file and returned to litigation-II section", i. e. , the file was reviewed after it was put up on 9-4-1996. It has been stated earlier that the case worker has put up the file on 9-4-1996 and the Under-Secretary returned the file the same day i. e. , on 9-4-1996. From 9-4-1996, it appears, nothing was done by the case worker in the section. As stated in the affidavit, after 9-4-1996 file was again moved and it was sent