2025:JHHC:11275-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P No. 989 of 2024 --------- Regional Chief, Housing and Urban Development Corporation Limited. … … Petitioner Versus Amit Kumar Dhar, son of Sri Ramesh Ranjan Dhar, resident of Near Tagore Hill, Morabadio, P.S. Bariatu, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Saurav Arun, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Amit Sinha, Advocate ----------- 07/Dated: 11th April, 2025 I.A. No. 10480 of 2024: 1. Heard the parties. 2. Instant interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been preferred by the petitioner for condoning the delay of 175 days in filing this petition. 3. Having been satisfied with the reasons assigned in the instant application, the same is allowed, as such, disposed of and the delay of 175 days in filing the instant petition is hereby condoned. C.M.P No. 989 of 2024 1. This present petition has been filed for the restoration of C.M.P. No. 86 of 2019 which has been dismissed for default due to non- compliance of the peremptory order dated 25.01.2024. 2. Mr. Saurabh Arun, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in pursuance to the notice issued by this Court on sole respondent, an affidavit has been filed by the respondent/opposite party wherein it has been stated in para-5 that the writ-petitioner, respondent/opposite party herein, does not want to take advantage of the order dated 10.02.2009 passed in W.P.(S) 2380 of 2003 due to the reason that writ-petitioner, respondent/opposite party herein, has got appointment in Vidhan 2025:JHHC:11275-DB 2 Sabha as Reporter and as such, he has no grievance with the present petitioner herein. 3. It has further been stated at Para-6 of the counter affidavit that the writ-petitioner, respondent/opposite party herein, has no interest in proceeding with the matter in the L.P.A. or in the instant C.M.P. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, has submitted that in view of the aforesaid stand taken by the writ-petitioner, respondent/opposite party herein, he is not pressing the instant petition. 5. Considering the aforesaid submission as has been noted herein above, there is no need to pass any further order, as such, the present petition is dismissed as not pressed, accordingly, disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Amar/-