T. Nandakumar Singh, J.

1. In the present application for condonation of delay of 2141 days in preferring the review petition, the Applicants/state had seriously blamed the concerned Govt. Advocate/Advocates who had been entrusted to appear on behalf of the Applicants/state in WA No. 90/2000 for not conducting the appeal with due diligence. But it goes without saying that if appeals filed by the government are lost for default of the concerned Govt. employee or the Govt. Advocate, no person is individually affected but what, in the ultimate analysis, suffers is the public interest.

2. Mr. H.N.K. Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the Applicants/state contended that the consequence of the dismissal of the W.A. No. 90/2000 filed by the Applicants/state on withdrawal would be the loss of money amounting to around Rs. 4 (four) crores from the public exchequer. The Govt. Advocate or the officer concerned responsible for withdrawal of the WA. No. 90/2000 shall not be left scot free we also heard Mr. Roshni Piba, learned Counsel for the respondents.

3. By an order of this Court, WA No. 90/2000 filed by the Applicants/state was tagged with WA No. 98/2000 and WA No. 94/2000. I