IN THE HI€4H COHRT OF WDICATURE CHHA‘I’TISGARH AT BILASE? mam. i9 3g (’zam EEHTmNER /‘{ W$ $haraidha Truwers, Jewra sirsa. Eistt. Burg (CG) Thrwgh its yraprietor, ‘Eungarmal 53/0 wwolchani Jaih, ageaéi about 35 years, R/o Khamielwal Colony, yiou$e Nogl9-Js, mrg (CG). h \ VERSwS RESWEQDENTS 1) Anilélitianal Commissioner, Raigmr Eivisiona Raipur. 2) C¢llectorr wlrg mistt. mrg (CG) 3) state wf Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Revenue Department, EKS )h’awany Raiyur (CG) . wan g’ETITIOILUNEER ARTICLE‘EE’S/zz'l 0? mu cowsmwrmm OF I N m I A XI— HC—.22 SEW, 3W, m3? \ V WW HP~~1.935/‘01. .....W 200 .mmww mmu‘a‘wm , $Wm 17.10.2001 : Mr.P.Diwaka.: for the petitioner. Mr. Gautam ahaduri for the State. The appeal Eiled by the writ petitioner before the Additional Cornmi ssioner,Ra1pur,wae dlsmlssed on 29 9 2001 on the ground of delay of 26 days. Shri Dlwakar submits that for the ends of justice the learned Commissioner ought to have examined the merit of the case in stead of dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay. According to Shri ’Diwakar, the dalaY WES SUffiCientlY, rexplained. Shri Gautam 'Bhad i submits that it is for the competent authority to exam ne the merit of the questien of J delay also and. therefore no interference is called-for. After hearing learned counsel for both the sides and on perusal of the averments made in the writ petition as well as the impugned order of dismissal, I a ’of the opinion that it will be for the ends of justice that the petitioner s case before the appellate authority dhould be decided on merit. In my View this could have been done even subject to payment of some cost also. in the resuitmhis petition is allowed’ The order of dismissal passed b the learned Commissioner dated 79 . 9 ' air-aside .J‘he Lappealclshal]. nd decided I ’«~~ V W?W .. .-2 m j W‘W'(‘W) ’ g1:w»w«vmm. WW,» Vmm$afsa r mmm “ x ..2.. u“ Petit ioner on merit a£ter issuing nqtices to the parties. shall aopear beforé the Gommissionér on 30.10.2001. Let the petltioner pay cost of Rs. 500/—. It is stated that 1n respect of other 35 pérsons similarly situated, stay has been allowed. Accordingly a prayer has been made E \ that Annexure A-4 shouldQbe stayed in respect of the yit petitioner . g ' In my View itgi is for the learned Comiéfsioner to examine this aspeot at the matter. Let the writ) petitioner make—out a case § before the learned commissioner for interim order. Until: such interim order is considered ~ by the learned commissioher,the order annexure A-4 dt. 24.7.2001 shall remain stayed. Petition‘is disposed of. . § § ‘ Sdl- , ‘ Chief Justice mww