Poonam Rana vs. State of H.P. & Ors. CWPOA No.3235 of 2020 16.06.2026 Present: Mr. Varun Thakur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for the respondents- State. CMP-T No.77 of 2026 Despite last opportunity granted to the respondents to file reply, no reply has been filed. By way of present application filed under Order IX Rule 9 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a prayer has been made for restoration of the petition, which was dismissed for want of prosecution on 11.05.2022. It has been averred in the application that the counsel representing the applicant/petitioner neither informed about the dismissal of the case nor filed any application for restoration of the case. The applicant/petitioner came to know about dismissal of the petition for want of prosecution only on 24.11.2025, when she visited the office of her counsel and inquired about her case. Thereafter, the applicant/petitioner obtained NOC from her counsel on 24.11.2025 itself and engaged another counsel and the present application was prepared on 27.11.2025 and the same has been filed on 28.11.2025. As already observed above, the respondents did not file any reply to the application for restoration of the petition, despite granting various opportunities to them and it seems that they are not averse in case the application for restoration is allowed. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the application. It is settled by now that the parties should not suffer due to the negligence on the part of counsel. Once the petition was dismissed for want of prosecution on 11.05.2022, the least which was expected of the counsel, was to inform the petitioner about the same. Once the petitioner had come to know about the dismissal of the petition on 24.11.2025 and thereafter she has filed present application on 28.11.2025, the interest of justice demands that the application be allowed and the petition be restored. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in catena of judgments that the cases should be decided on merits. In the present case, since no response has been filed by the respondents to the application for restoration of the petition, I am of the considered view that the application deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. Order dated 11.05.2022 passed by this Court is recalled and the petition is restored to its original number and position. The application is accordingly disposed of. CMP(M) No.330 of 2026 In view of the order passed in the application for restoration of petition, present application has been rendered infructuous and is accordingly disposed of. CWPOA No.3235 of 2020 Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for and is granted four weeks’ time to file rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents. List on 07.07.2026. ( Jiya Lal Bhardwaj ) 16th June, 2026 Judge (Anurag)