[2025:RJ-JP:298] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 58/2021 M/s K K Marble, Mohalla Khora, Ashok Circle, Alwar Through Partner Kunj Bihari Gupta, Son Of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Gupta Aged About 62 Years Resident Of Sunder Das Marg, Dausa (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Mines And Geology, Secretariat, Jaipur 2. Joint Secretary, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Mines (Group -2) Department, Secretariat, Jaipur 3. Additional Director Mines (E & D), Department Of Mines And Geology, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Directorate Of Mines And Geology, Court Circle, Udaipur 4. Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Alwar ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 52/2021 M/s K K Marble, Mohalla Khora, Ashok Circle, Alwar Through Partner Kunj Bihari Gupta, Son Of Shri Kanhaiya Lal Gupta, Aged About 62 Years, Resident Of Sunder Das Marg, Dausa (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Mines And Geology, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Joint Secretary, Govt Of Rajasthan, Mines (Group-2) Department, Secretariat, Jaipur. 3. Additional Director, Mines (E & D), Department Of Mines And Geology, Govt Of Rajasthan, Directorate Of Mines And Geology, Court Circle, Udaipur. 4. Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Alwar. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chobisa with Mr. Veerendra Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Bharat Vyas, AAG with Ms. Aditi Vats [2025:RJ-JP:298] (2 of 2) [CW-58/2021] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Order 03/01/2025 1. These two writ petitions are being decided by this common order as the facts and issue involved are same. 2. These petitions have been filed aggrieved of dismissal of the appeal of the petitioner being time barred. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the decision of this Court dated 28.11.2023 passed in SBCWP No.1595/2023 titled as Abdul Kalam vs. Sate of Rajasthan and ors. and submits that matter be remitted back to the Appellate Authority to decide the application for condonation of delay afresh. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents defends the impugned order, however is not able to distinguish the decisions cited. 5. The writ petition is allowed in terms of the order dated 28.11.2023 passed in Abdul Kalam (supra) and the matter is remitted back to the First Appellate Authority to decide the application for condonation of delay afresh after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 6. In order to avoid any complication, let the petitioner or through its representative appear before the First Appellate Authority on 03.02.2025 at 11:00 A.M. (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J RIYA/38-39