As per case facts, the Petitioner's Writ Petition, challenging an ex parte Award, was dismissed for non-prosecution three times. After two previous restorations, the Petitioner sought restoration again and condonation ... of 395 days delay, attributing it to a change in counsel and inability to track the case. The Respondent opposed, citing the Petitioner's repeated negligence. The question arose whether the Petitioner, a government entity, provided sufficient cause for condonation of delay and restoration, given its history of defaults and the legal standards for state agencies. Finally, the court held that the Petitioner's explanation was vague and demonstrated gross negligence and lack of bona fides. It emphasized that government departments must act diligently and dismissed the applications for condonation of delay and restoration, finding no merit in the Petitioner's arguments.