( 2025:JHHC:29104 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No.3 of 2024 ------ Chetlal Gope aged about 62 years, son of Late Rupen Gope, resident of village-Coaldiha Mohalla, P.O.-Giridih, P.S.-Giridih Town, District-Giridih. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner, Giridih office at Lellutunti Building, P.O. + P.S.-Giridih, Dist.-Giridih. 2. Rajendra Prasad Yadav, son of Late Ram Lal Yadav, Resident of village-Coaldiha Mohalla, P.O.-Girdih, P.S.-Giridih Town, District-Giridih. … Opposite Parties ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Mithilesh Singh, GA-IV : Mr. Bhanu Pratap, AC to GA-IV For the OP 2 : Mr. Deepak Kr. Singh, Advocate ------ Order No:-06 Dated:-19-09-2025 Heard the parties. This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer for restoration of M.A. No.550 of 2019 to its original file which stood dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 17.01.2023. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that M.A. No.550 of 2019 stood dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 17.01.2023. It is next submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner could not remove the defects within the stipulated time; which resulted in dismissal of the said M.A. No.550 of 2019 for non-compliance of the order dated 17.01.2023. It is next submitted that non-compliance of the said order dated 17.01.2023 was neither deliberate nor intentional. It is also submitted that the petitioner has very good grounds to agitate in the said M.A. No.550 of 2019 and unless the same is restored to its original file, the petitioner will be highly prejudiced. Hence, it is submitted that the M.A. No.550 of 2019 be restored to its original file. Learned counsel appearing for the State has not raised any serious objection. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for restoration of the said M.A. No.550 of 2019 and submits that the opposite party no.2 will unnecessarily be harassed if the same is restored to its original file, hence, the opposite party no.2 be compensated adequately, in terms of cost. Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, M.A. No.550 of 2019 is directed to be restored to its original file, at the same stage at which it was before its dismissal, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- by the petitioner to the opposite party no.2 through his counsel appearing in the record, within four weeks from the date of this order. Registry is directed to list M.A. No.550 of 2019 before the concerned Bench after four weeks only if the petitioner files the proof of payment of the cost of Rs.5,000/- to the opposite party No.2 through his counsel appearing in the record within four weeks from the date of this order failing which this conditional order shall not be given effect to and M.A. No.550 of 2019 shall remain dismissed. This civil miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 19/09/2025 Abhiraj/