Judgment : Rule, with the consent of the parties made returnable and heard forthwith. 2.This Petition filed by the Gram Panchayat, Anjuna, takes exception to the Order dated 09.06.2009 passed by the Deputy Director of Panchayats, North Goa, Panaji. By the said Order, an application for condonation of delay of 10 days in filing the Appeal by the Petitioner came to be rejected. 3.Suffice it to say that the Petitioner is aggrieved by the permission granted by the Block Development Officer for transfer of water connection and house tax to the Respondents in respect of which the respondent had made an application to the Block Development Officer in view of the provisions of Section 201-A of the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. The said application came to be granted by the Block Development Officer by Order dated 25.02.2009 directing the Petitioner to issue the necessary NOCs for transfer of the said water connection and house tax. 4.The Petitioner aggrieved by the said decision dated 25.02.2009, filed a Revision application before the Deputy Director of Panchayats, North Goa, Panaji. Since the said Revision was belated by about ten days, the Petitioner filed an application for condonation of delay of the said ten days. The reasons why the delay has occurred have been mentioned in the said application. It has been averred that though the certified copy was given on 18.03.2009, it was misplaced in the office of the Petitioner and could not be traced for one week and, thereafter, the Advocate for the Petitioner was not available for filing the said Revision. 5.The said application was considered by the authority i.e. the Deputy Director of Panchayats and by the impugned Order, has been rejected. The principal ground on which the said application was rejected was that the Petitioner had been callous in filing the said Revision and that there was no justification for filing the said Revision belatedly after ten days. 6.I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and considered the rival contentions. Admittedly, the Revision has been filed by the Petitioner which is belated by ten days. The justification has been given by the Petitioner. The Petitioner is a Panchayat as established by the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and it is possible that on account of its working or functioning, a delay of ten days has occurred. Admittedly, the Revision has been filed by the Petitioner which is belated by ten days. The justification has been given by the Petitioner. The Petitioner is a Panchayat as established by the Goa Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and it is possible that on account of its working or functioning, a delay of ten days has occurred. The Authority in my view has taken a highly technical view whilst rejecting the said application. It is well settled by catena of Judgments of the Apex Court that in matters of condonation of delay a highly pedantic and technical approach should be avoided and an approach which furthers the course of substantial justice should be adopted, applying the above dictum of the Apex Court in my view, the delay of ten days is required to be condoned in the interest of justice. 7.The Petition is accordingly allowed in terms of the sole prayer therein made in the prayer clause, resultantly, the delay stands condoned. The Deputy Director of Panchayats, North Goa, Panaji, is directed to hear and dispose of the said Revision Application within a period of two months of the receipt of the Order of this Court. The parties to appear before the Deputy Director of Panchayats on 25.11.2009 at 4.00 p.m. The authority to decide the said application on its own merits and in accordance with law without being influenced by this Order or the Order which it had passed earlier. 8.Rule is accordingly made absolute in the aforesaid terms. 9.Parties to act upon a copy of this Order duly authenticated by the Court Sheristedar.