JUDGMENT : 1. Special leave petition has been filed fifty nine days beyond limitation. We have gone through the application filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh for condonation of delay. The Authorised Officer (Special Tehsildar) Karimnagar, in the Department of Land Reforms, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, has filed a detailed affidavit explaining the movements of the file from one department to another. We are satisfied with the explanation offered by the State of Andhra Pradesh in support of its application for condonation of delay. We, therefore, condone the delay. 2. Special leave granted. 3. P.V. Narasimharao and his three sons, namely, P.V. Ranga Rao, P.V. Rajeshwar Rao and P.V. Prabhakar Rao, filed separate declarations under the Andhra Pradesh Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act, 1973 (the Act) before the Land Reforms Tribunal, Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the holdings of the appellants to the extent of 11.2544, 0.3562, 0.5464 and 11.2544 S.H. respectively were in excess of the ceiling provided under the Act. The sons went in appeal against the order of the Tribunal before the Appellate Tribunal which was dismissed in default. The revision petition filed by them before the High Court was, however, allowed and the case was remanded back to the Appellate Tribunal for fresh decision. The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated May 17, 1979 remanded the matter back to the original Tribunal for fresh disposal in the light of the various directions given by the Appellate Tribunal. 4. The Tribunal clubbed the, holdings of the father and the three sons and treated the family as a joint family. The Tribunal also allowed exclusions to the extent of 192.56 acres of land (4.0756 S.H.) which was subject matter of the sales entered into by the appellants. Aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal the State Government went in appeal before the Appellate Tribunal which dismissed the same on the ground that it was beyond limitation by two days. The Appellate Tribunal declined to condone the delay of two days in filing the appeal. The revision petition filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh before the High Court was also dismissed. This appeal by way of special leave petition by the State of Andhra Pradesh is against the order of the Appellate Tribunal as upheld by the High Court. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The revision petition filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh before the High Court was also dismissed. This appeal by way of special leave petition by the State of Andhra Pradesh is against the order of the Appellate Tribunal as upheld by the High Court. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We are of the view that the Appellate Tribunal was not justified in rejecting the application of the State Government for condoning two days delay in filing the appeal. The Authorised Officer, Department of Land Reforms, Government of Andhra Pradesh filed an affidavit explaining the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. It was stated by the Authorised Officer that the order under appeal was received on September 17, 1981 but since the connected file was not traceable no action could be taken by the department. He further stated that after vigorous search the file was traced only on October 28, 1981. Thereafter the case was processed and the appeal was filed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal was not justified in rejecting the application for condonation of delay of two days in filing the appeal. There were sufficient grounds before the Tribunal to condone the delay. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal- Karimnagar dated May 1, 1982 and as a consequence the order of the High Court dated November 5, 1984 and remand the case to the Land Reforms Appellate Tribunal, Karimnagar for fresh decision on merits after hearing the parties. We direct the parties to appear before the Appellate Tribunal on March 2, 1993. The Appellate Tribunal shall give opportunity to both the parties to lead fresh evidence if they so desire. Since the matter is pending for two decades we direct the Appellate Tribunal to finally dispose of the appeal on or before June 30, 1993. In case any revision is filed by either of the parties under the Act we request the High Court to dispose of the same within three months of the filing of the revision petition. The appeal is allowed in the above 3 terms. No costs.