HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 6767 of2007 PETITIONER : Hinsuram S/o Tukaram Lodhi (Verma), aged about 42 years R/o Villagc Bhaisatara, Police Station Chumka, District Raipur (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS z 1. State of Chhattisgm‘h Through the Secretary Home Depamnent (appellate mlthm‘ity): DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG). 2. District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon (CG). ¥ (WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTYIT )TION OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agilillotli J.) f Present '. Shri Anup Majumdar, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 35E; of February, 2008) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was extemed by order dated 17.04.2007 (Armexure P/l) passed by the District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority vide memo appeal dated 10.08.2007 (Almexure P/2). The appellate authority issued a notice to the petitioner dated 07.09.2007 to appear on 13.09.2007 at 11.00 AM. The petitioner received the said notice on 13.09.2007 itself. The appellate authority," without extending time to enable the petitioner to appear in the hearing of appeal, dismissed the appeal. Thus, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the appellate authority has dismissed the appeal without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. I have heard teamed counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. It is evident that the petitioner was not present on the date of hearing which was fixed on 13.09.2007. Thus, it is expedient ‘ . in the interest ofjustice that the petitionar be given an oppommity of hearing to remain present before the appellate authority and the appellate authority will consider the case on its own merit, in accordance with law, atter affording an opportunity ofhearing to the petitioner. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that. the petitioner will present himself before the appellate authority on 25.02.2008. The appellate authority, alter hearing the petitioner, shall pass an order in accordance with law, to which learned counsel appearing for the State has no obj ection. ] 6. In View ofthe foregoing, this petition stands disposed of. No order asto costs. ‘ Sd/— l 1' Satish K. Agnihotri Salm Judge