LPA No. 1684 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No. 1684 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 10.12.2010 Gajjan Singh and others ….. APPELLANTS VERSUS State of Haryana and others ….. RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. R.S.Mamli, Advocate, for the appellants. *** Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) Vide order dated 11.03.2010, appeal filed by the Gram Panchayat was dismissed being time barred by the Appellate Authority. The Gram Panchayat went in revision, which was allowed by the Commissioner and the appellate order was set aside. Delay in filing the appeal was condoned and the matter was remitted to the Collector to decide it on merits. Against that order, the appellants filed CWP No. 20461 of 2010, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 17.10.2010 by observing as under:- “I have heard counsel for the petitioners, perused the impugned order and find no reason in the exercise of writ jurisdiction to interfere with the order passed by the LPA No. 1684 of 2010 (O&M) 2 Commissioner. The appeal filed by the Gram Panchayat was dismissed as time barred, without taking into consideration, the sufficient cause shown by the Gram Panchayat. The Commissioner, therefore, rightly remitted the matter to the Collector. The observations made by the Commissioner, on the merits of the case, are not binding upon the Collector, who would be required to decide the appeal in accordance with the pleadings and the evidence on record. The argument that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction, to entertain the revision, may be correct but as justice has been done, this Court does not deem it appropriate to entertain the petition in the exercise of his extra ordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.” We feel that the order passed is perfectly justified. We feel that it was not proper for the Appellate Authority to dismiss the appeal being time barred. The delay was not huge. Otherwise also, there was sufficient explanation for condonation of delay. No case for interference is made out. Dismissed. ( JASBIR SINGH ) JUDGE ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE December 10, 2010 pj