1. This appeal filed under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949 is directed against the order dated 16th February, 2004 passed by the learned Single Judge, in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1227/2000. In the writ petition out of which this Special Appeal arises, the appellant has challenged the orders dated 10th November, 1997 (Annexure- 2) and dated 2nd March, 2000 (Annexure- 3) respectively. Under the later order dated 10th November; 1997 Aanexure-2 in the writ petition the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, Sikar allowed the application filed by the respondent workman under Section 15 of the Act and the order for payment of Rs. b6,2281- had been passed in favour of the respondent workman and against the appellant.

2. Against this order, the appellant preferred an appeal under Section 17 of the Act aforesaid before the learned District Judge, Sikar and the same was dismissed on 2.3.2000. Against the order dated 2nd March, 2000 of the learned Distt. Judge, Sikar, the appellant filed the writ petition, out of which this appeal arises.

3. The appeal is barred by 458 days. The appellant filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, praying therein for condonation of this delay made in filing the appeal. Having carefully gone through the contents of the application, we are satisfied that the appellant has utterly failed to furnish any cause much less any sufficient cause by which it was prevented from filing the appeal within limitation. The appellant has not filed the affidavit of Mr. Azad Ahmed in support of the averments made in pare 2 of the application. In the absence of the affidavit of Mr. Azad Ahmad, Advocate, whatever, aforesaid stated, cannot be believed what to say to accept it. It appears to be a ground concocted or manufactured.

4. Leaving apart that the appellant has failed to furnish any explanation for this delay, otherwise also, having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, we do not find any merits in the appeal.

5. The respondent workman is a physically handicapped person and belongs to Schedule Caste. He was appointed in the service of the Social Welfare Department, in the year 1986 as a temporary part time Farash and was posted under the Distt. Children Officer, Sikar He was paid Rs. 11/- on daily wages basis. His services were terminated under the order dated 6th September, 1990 on the basis of the directions issued by the Director, Social Welfare Department, Jaipur. The respondent workman challenged this order in the Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5813/1990 and the same was decided on 28th November, 1991. The learned Single Judge, allowed the writ petition and the operative part of the judgment of the learned Single Judge reads as under:-

"The result of the above discussion is that the writ petition 39 succeeds and it is hereby allowed. The order of termination of his service issued on 6.9.90 is declared void and it is hereby quashed. Circular dated 7.8.90 issued by the Director. Social Welfare Department is declared as an act of unfair labour practice and is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to treat the petitioner's service as continuous as if order dated 6.9.90 had not been passed. The petitioner shall be given all consequential benefits on that basis. The respondents are also directed to examine the question of regularisation of the service of the petitioner within three months and pass necessary order in accordance with Rules. Parties are left to bear their own costs."

6. Learned counsel for the appellant very fairly conceded that the judgment of the learned Single Judge aforesaid has been challenged in the appeal and the same was dismissed. Thus, the judgment of the learned Single Judge attained the finality. The respondent appellant was directed to treat the respondent workman's services as continue as if the order dated 6th September, 1990 had not been passed. The respondent appellant had also been directed to give all consequenti