IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ORDER 27.11.2008. S.B. CIVIL MISC. RESTORATION APPLICATIONNO.525/2008 IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.02949/2007 (Def.) M/s. Pansari Metali Yarn Indstries Vs. The Customs, Excise & Serviuce Tax Appellate Tribunal and Anr. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Shri Abhay Jain, for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The matter comes up by way of restoration application. In the writ petition which was filed on 26.11.2007 the office pointed out the defects. The case was listed before the Registrar on 21.1.2008 from the defect side. None appeared for the petitioner before the Registrar. Two weeks time was granted to remove the defects. Thereafter the case come up before the court since the defects were not removed on 7.2.2008. On 7.2.2008 in the presence of the counsel for the petitioner two weeks further time was allowed for removing the defects. Inspite of time having been granted on 7.2.2008 the defect was not removed and the case was listed before the court on 23.7.2008. On 23.7.2008 none was present on behalf of the petitioner and the court still granted two weeks time by a pre-emptory order to remove the defect but the defect was not removed and consequently the writ petition came to be dismissed, as a result of the pre-emptory order dated 23.7.2008, on 25.8.2008. Thereafter on 26.8.2008 this present restoration application has been filed. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the counsel for the petitioner did not notice the case in the cause list on 23.7.2008 and the pre- emptory order came to be passed in his absence. In the present case in my opinion the party and counsel did not remove the defect when the case was listed before the Registrar on 21.8.2008. An opportunity was granted to remove the defect. Again the court granted two weeks time to remove the defect but defect was not removed. More than five months elapsed when the matter was listed before the court again on 23.7.2008 when two weeks time was allowed. There is no explanation as to why the defect could not be removed inspite the time having been granted on 21.1.2008 and 7.2.2008 for a period of five months. In facts and circumstances I find no good ground to restore the writ petition and the same is dismissed. (DALIP SINGH),J. Ramchandrkhatri,PS