IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 4542 of 2025 Decided on 28th March 2025 Balak Ram …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge 1Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Pushpinder Singh Jaswal, Additional Advocate General. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Issue notice. Mr. Pushpinder Singh Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. In the light of the controversy involved in this writ petition and with the consent of the parties, the matter has been heard at this stage itself. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that an appeal preferred by him against the order of eviction alongwith an application filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal was rejected by the Appellate Authority by not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and the revision preferred against the said order 2 was also dismissed by the Revisional Authority. 4. Mr. G.R. Palsra, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was proceeded against ex parte by the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade, who passed the order of eviction. In the light of the fact that the petitioner was not aware of said order, he preferred an appeal, which was accompanied by an application praying for condonation of delay of 42 days. He submitted that despite the fact that the delay was explainable, the Appellate Authority arbitrarily rejected the application filed for condonation of delay. He further submitted that even the Revisional Authority has not appreciated this aspect of the matter that the petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte erroneously and there was no occasion for him to have had defended the matter before Assistant Collector 2nd Grade and thus, as great injustice has been caused to the petitioner, the impugned orders need interference. 5. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the petitioner first of all despite service did not appear before the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade and thereafter he filed an appeal which was hopelessly time barred. He submitted that the delay was of almost 4 months and in this view of the fact, as the petitioner was not able to satisfactorily explain the delay, the Authorities have rightly rejected the appeal as well as the Revision 3 Petition. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having carefully gone through the orders in issue, this Court is of the considered view that be it a delay of 42 days or 4 months, it would have been in the interest of justice, in case, the delay in filing the appeal stood condoned and the petitioner was given an opportunity to assail the order passed by Assistant Collector 2nd Grade on merit. The Court is making this observation for the reason that even if it is assumed that the delay in filing the appeal was of 4 months, it cannot be said to be so gross a delay which if interfered with, would have caused some irreparable prejudice to the other party, which in the present case is none but the State. 7. Accordingly, in the light of above discussions, this petition is allowed. The orders passed by the Appellate Authority as well as the Revisional Authority are set aside and it is directed that the appeal filed by the petitioner be heard by the Appellate Authority by treating the same to be within limitation. This will be subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- by the petitioner to the District Legal Services Authority Mandi. In the event of the cost being deposited by the petitioner within a period of four weeks from today, he shall move an appropriate application before the Appellate Authority calling upon the Appellate Authority to take up the appeal and decide 4 the same on merits by appending therewith the decision of this Court passed, together. It is clarified that in case the cost is not paid within a period of four weeks from today, this order shall lose its efficacy. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge March 28, 2025 (Vinod)