2025:HHC:29630 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 3150 of 2019 Decided on : 01.09.2025 Shami …Petitioner Versus The Financial Commissioner (Appeals) and others. …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. R.L. Verma, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1. Mr. Maan Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.2(a) to 2(c), 3 to 10, 12, 13, 15(a) to 15(c), 16 to 18, 20 to 22. Names of respondents No.14 & 23 are deleted from the array of parties vide order dated 25.08.2025. Respondents No.11, 24, 26 & 27 are proceeded against exparte. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has assailed order dated 08.08.2019, Annexure P-1, passed by learned 1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:29630 Financial Commissioner (Appeals), in terms whereof, application filed by the petitioner for restoration of the petition was dismissed, on the ground of the petitioner having approached the Court belatedly. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the impugned order, this Court is of the considered view that it would have been in the interest of justice, in case, learned Court below had condoned the delay in filing the application for restoration. 3. Though the petitioner did approach the Court after five months as from the date of dismissal of the case for non- prosecution, however, taking into consideration the fact that the limitation period is of 30 days and thereafter the delay was of about four months, endeavour ought to have been to decide the case on merit by allowing the application by imposing some cost upon the petitioner rather than dismissing the same. 4. Therefore, in light of above observations, this petition is allowed. Order dated 08.08.2019, Annexure P-1, passed by learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals) is set aside. The delay in filing the application for restoration of the 3 2025:HHC:29630 matter before the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals) is condoned. The matter is ordered to be restored to its original number, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5000/-, by the petitioner to the private respondents. In case, said cost is paid by the petitioner to the private respondents through respondent No.3 Narain Krishan, in whose name a bank draft shall be prepared by the petitioner and handed over to the party or learned counsel representing the said party, on the next date of hearing, the matter shall be restored to its original number by the learned Court of Financial Commissioner (Appeals) and heard on merit. However, if needful in terms of this order is not done by the petitioner by the next date of hearing, then this order will loose its efficacy and order dated 08.08.2019, Annexure P-1, passed by learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals), shall become enforceable. Parties through counsel are directed to appear before the learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals) on 19.09.2025. It is clarified that in case, learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals) is not hearing matters on the said date, even then, the cost shall be paid by way of a bank draft before some Officer/Official of the Court of 4 2025:HHC:29630 the said Authority and if needful is done then the matter will be listed for the next date, in terms of the roster of the Court of learned Financial Commissioner (Appeals). 5. The petition is disposed of in above-said terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge September 01, 2025 (Shivank Thakur)