Rakesh Tiwari, J. - This first appeal is reported by the Stamp Reporter to be beyond time by 161 days from 8.2.2010. It is also reported that there is deficiency of 10335/- in payment of the court fee according to valuation of the appeal, and accordingly the appeal is reported to be defective one and has been filed alongwith delay condonation application No. 205599 of 2010 supported by affidavit.

2. I have heard Sri Shrish Chandra, learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant - State of U.P. and perused the reasons given in the affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application explaining the delay.

3. It appears from the averments made in the affidavit that there might not be negligence on part of the State for the period upto 31.12.2009. But thereafter delay has not properly been explained and cursory statement has been made to cover up the delay in filing the appeal. There is no reasonable explanation as to why appeal was not filed immediately after 31.12.2009. It is beyond comprehension why the government did not grant permission for filing the appeal immediately after 31.12.2009 which was allegedly granted on 7.4.2010 which is said to have been receive