IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18502 of 2010 RAM BILASH DUBEY @ RAMESHWAR PANDEY, SON OF LATE SARYUG DUBEY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KANHAULI , P.S. MAZHARUL HAQUE NAGAR, SIWAN …PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. ADDITIONAL MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE, MAIN SECRETARIAT, PATNA 3. COLLECTOR, SIWAN 4. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, SIWAN 5. MADAN DUBEY, SON OF LATE JAGDISH DUBEY 6. RAMESHWAR DUBEY SON OF LATE RAJ KUMAR DUBEY, Respondents NO.5 AND 6 ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KANHAULI P.S. MAZHARUL HAQUE NAGAR SIWAN. …RESPONDENTS For the petitioner :Mr. Durgesh Nandan, :Mr. B.B.Kumar For respondents :Mr. Abhay Krishna For the State :Mr. AC to SC II ----------- 03. 13.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, State and the private respondents. Present application is directed against the order dated 19.01.2010 and subsequent orders dated 23.06.2010 and 28.07.2010, passed by respondent-Additional Member, Board of Revenue. By the first order, the revision application preferred by the petitioner was dismissed for non-prosecution. By the subsequent orders prayers for restoration of the case have been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made diverse submissions in order to show that on the date when the case was called out counsel for the petitioner could not appear, although the petitioner was present, as a result whereof the application stood dismissed for non-prosecution. It is submitted that the revisional court, being the final court, ought to have allowed the 2 restoration application which was filed, but beyond 30 days. It is the submission of the petitioner that in the interest of justice impugned orders be quashed and the matter be remitted back to the respondent-Additional Member, Board of Revenue for deciding the revision application on merit. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private respondents has taken a very fair stand in the case and submitted that in the interest of justice this Court may pass an appropriate order. Having regard to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court is satisfied that the matter should be remanded back to the respondent, Additional Member Board of Revenue for hearing and disposal of the aforesaid revision application being case no. 8 of 2005 on merit in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner assures this Court that no adjournment in the case shall be taken once the matter is remitted back to the said respondent for disposal of the revision application on merit. Consequently, orders impugned dated 19.01.2010, 23.06.2010 and 28.07.2010 are quashed and set aside. Revision application being case no. 8 of 2005 is restored on the file of respondent-Additional Member, Board of Revenue for disposal in accordance with law. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent- Addl. Member, Board of Revenue within 04 (four weeks) and 3 file a copy of the present order enabling the said court to proceed to dispose of the matter. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )