1. Despite service no body appeared on behalf of respondent. 2. Objections have not been filed. 3. The applicant-appellant, the intending department, was not impleaded as party by the Civil Court, to which, reference was made under Section 18 of the State Land Acquisition Act by the Collector. The Civil Court enhanced the compensation amount which was assessed and fixed by the Collector. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that it is the appellant, who has been saddled with the responsibility of paying enhanced compensation without affording opportunity of being heard. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted, and same is pleaded in the application also that cross appeal was filed by the respondents in respect of the same award, in which the this Court suo-moto ordered for impleadment of DEO as party respondent vide its order dated 14th March, 2007. Learned counsel submitted, that the counsel, who was representing the applicant-appellant, did not inform the applicant-appellant about this development, thus even at that point of time, the applicant could not get the knowledge of the impugned award. It is submitted that the said appeal is still pending. It is pleaded as also submitted at bar that the applicant-appellant got the knowledge on 16th April, 2007. Learned counsel submitted, that the counsel, who was representing the appellant in 2007, misguided the applicant-appellant by advising them only to file application in the pending appeal and did not advise for filing of appeal. Learned counsel submitted that acting bonafide on advise of earlier counsel, the appeal could not be filed within time. Learned counsel further submitted that the delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate. 6. This application deserves to be allowed for the following reasons:- a. The impugned judgement has been passed against the applicant-appellant, though he was not a party in the proceedings and judgement has been passed without notice to him; b. The counsel, who was representing the applicant/appellant earlier had not properly advised them, which resulted in delay in filing of the appeal; c. The appeal filed by the respondents in respect of the impugned jugement is pending on the files of this Court; d. The delay in filing the appeal in these circumstances is neither intentional nor deliberate. Public interest is involved, the appeal would require to be decided on its merits. 7. Public interest is involved, the appeal would require to be decided on its merits. 7. This Application is, accordingly, allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 8. Disposed of. 9. List the appeal alongwith connected CMP(s).