Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CMAPL No.888 of 2023 M.C. of Kambeda High School, Kambeda, Malkangiri ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. – Mr. Mahendra Kumar Sahoo -versus- State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.- Mr. U.C. Jena, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 15.04.2026 Order No. 04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. 3. The present CMAPL has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer for restoration of the FAO No.432 of 2019, which was dismissed due to non-prosecution vide order dated 30.06.2023 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that although the matter was listed on 30.06.2023 before the then Chief Justice, who was sitting single half day on Friday, learned counsel representing the Petitioner did not know about the listing Page 2 of 3. of the matter, as he missed the cause list. As a result of which, he could not be able to attend the aforesaid case on 30.06.2023. As such, the coordinate Bench presided over by the then Chief Justice, after recording the fact that none appears for the Appellant, dismissed F.A.O. for non-prosecution. He further submitted that such dismissal of the FAO is not within the knowledge of the Appellant-Petitioner till the time he filed the CMAPL in the year 2023. He further submitted that after coming to know about the fate of the FAO, the Appellant-Petitioner immediately filed the CMAPL with a prayer for restoration of the FAO, although the same was filed with a delay of 653 days. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture, contended that such delay was not intentional nor deliberate and that the same is due to lack of knowledge of the Appellant- Petitioner about the fate of the case, which was dismissed due to non-prosecution by virtue of order dated 30.06.2023. 6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, objected to such condonation of delay as well as allowing the CMAPL application. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the State contended that delay has not been properly explained by the Appellant. On such ground, learned counsel for the State contended that delay in filing the present CMAPL should not be condoned. Accordingly, the CMAPL as well as application for condonation of delay be dismissed. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful Page 3 of 3. examination of the background facts of the present case, further taking note of the dispute involved in the F.A.O. preferred by the Petitioner-Appellant, the delay of 653 days in filing the present CMAPL is hereby condoned subject to the Petitioner depositing a cost of Rs.1,500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred) in the Juvenile Justice Fund managed by the Member Secretary, Odisha State Legal Services Authority. 8. Subject to deposit of such cost, the CMAPL stands allowed. 9. Since the CMAPL has been allowed subject to deposit of the aforesaid cost by the Petitioner, the F.A.O. be restored to file and placed before the appropriate assigned Bench in the week commencing 27th April, 2026. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Debasis `