IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MJC No.3203 of 2009 UDAY KANT JHA . Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. . ----------- 03. 14-July-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Jha No.2, learned Advocate who was earlier counsel of the petitioner in Civil Review No.75/2001 which was dismissed for non appearance of the counsel on 13.1.2009. 2. The restoration petition is said to be barred by limitation. 3. Although, the grounds taken by the petitioner for condoning delay does not appeal to this Court in view of the fact disclosed by the earlier counsel Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Jha No.2, considering that the review has arisen out of a writ proceeding and the restoration petition appears to have been filed within one year of dismissal, the alleged delay is condoned. But on merits, it is found that the petitioner has not come with clean hands and according to the facts disclosed to the Court by the earlier counsel, the petitioner had taken away the file about 1 and ½ years before the dismissal of the review application and when the matter 2 was listed, he did not respond to the intimations sent by the counsel. In that view of the matter the restoration application is found to be without merit. It is accordingly dismissed. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)