Mr. Justice H.S. Brar, President—It is an application for condonation of delay of 7 days in filing the appeal against the order dated 18.10.2002 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ropar (hereinafter referred to as the “District Forum”).

2. Notice in this misc. application was given to the respondent, who has filed the reply to the same.

3. Counsel for the appellant-applicant (hereinafter called the “applicant”) has reiterated the same facts for condoning the delay which have been taken in ground No. 2 of the application. Counsel for the applicant has also relied upon a judgment of the Supreme Court reported as N. Balakrishan v. M. Krishnamurthy, =1999 (1) PLR 462.

4. We have heard Counsel for the parties. The ground taken by the applicant for condonation of delay in Para 2 of the application, and canvassed before us by his Counsel, is reproduced as under :

“That there is 7 days’ delay in filing the said appeal which has occurred due to unavoidable reasons because of the over-occupation of the appellant/complainant in the affairs of the State as he is a highly placed officer as Chief Engineer in the P.W.D. (B&R) and is required to attend to his duties even on hol