2025:UHC:8029 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2595/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J 1. Mr. Prem Kaushal, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. N.S. Pundir, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand. 3 District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar passed an order under provisions of Uttarakhand Minor Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Illegal Transport and Illegal Storage) Rules, 2021 against the petitioner, asking him to deposit ₹27,21,600/- as royalty with penalty, vide order dated 14.09.2023. 4. Petitioner filed appeal along with delay condonation application against District Magistrate’s order, before Commissioner, Kumaon Division. His appeal was dismissed for non prosecution on 14.05.2025. On 19.05.2025, petitioner filed application for restoring the appeal and submitted that the default was not intentional. 5. Learned Commissioner dismissed the appeal by holding that on five earlier dates also, i.e. 29.01.2025, 27.02.2025, 20.03.2025, 02.04.2025 & 23.04.2025, there was no representation for the appellant. Learned Commissioner further held that order passed by District Magistrate was appealed against with the delay of about 13 months and appellant did not appear on the dates fixed for consideration of delay condonation application. The Commissioner, thus, 2025:UHC:8029 inferred that appellant is deliberately delaying disposal of the appeal. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to certified copy of the order sheet, which is on record as Annexure 10 to the writ petition, for contending that Presiding Officer himself was not available for hearing the appeal on 29.01.2025, 27.02.2025, 02.04.2025 and 23.04.2025 and appellant remained unrepresented only on 20.03.2025. 7. Upon perusal of the order sheet, this Court finds substance in the said contention. Perusal of order dated 30.07.2025, whereby petitioner’s restoration application was rejected, it is further revealed that another ground for rejecting petitioner’s restoration application is delay in filing the appeal. 8. Since appeal was dismissed due to non-appearance of the petitioner on 14.05.2025 and on earlier dates indicated in the impugned order, Presiding Officer himself was not available, except 20.03.2025, to hear the appeal, therefore, rejection of restoration application does not appear to be justified. The delay in filing appeal cannot have any relevance while considering the prayer for restoration of the appeal, as application for condonation of delay is still pending before learned Commissioner. 9. For the aforesaid reasons, order dated 30.07.2025 passed by Commissioner, Kumaon Division is set aside. The appeal filed by petitioner along with delay condonation application, shall stand restored to file of learned Commissioner, Kumaon Division, who shall decide the same on merits. 2025:UHC:8029 10. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid terms. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J) 10.09.2025 Aswal NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Digitally signed by NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=eacc6757ee7881e933ff8934f07477005aa85f9802a3a08b08 d1369512ea30f3, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=44EB54CBF00B7698CB6F10C2CE3D26F5C22DACF4F 4610C1FE58A58531726FBB0, cn=NITI RAJ SINGH ASWAL Date: 2025.09.15 03:51:15 -07'00'