2025:HHC:45080 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP NO.19505 of 2025 Decided on: 22.12.2025 Yashwant Kumar … Petitioner Versus State of H.P & Others … Respondent Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. G.R. Palsra, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Additional Advocate General, for respondent Nos.1 & 2. Respondent No.3 ex-parte. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) Respondent No.3 served. Learned counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that respondent No.3 has been served by way of Dasti notice. As none has put in appearance for it, therefore, the respondent No.3 proceeded exparte. 2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- (I)That the impugned letter dated 27.08.2025 contained in Annexure P-7 may kindly be quashed and set aside by issuing a writ of certiorari. (ii) That the respondent No.3 may kindly be directed to decide the second appeal filed by the petitioner afresh on merits by issuing a writ of mandamus. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. 2025:HHC:45080 (iii) That the respondents may kindly be directed to supply the required information to the petitioner by issuing a writ of mandamus. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure P-7, in terms whereof, the appeal filed by the petitioner has been returned back to the petitioner by the office of H.P State Information Commission with the remarks that the same was time barred. 4. This Court is of the considered view that this is no way in which the appeals are to be dealt with by Statutory Tribunals or Commissions. 5. Even if appeal preferred by the appellant before such Tribunal is time barred, the appeal has to be listed before the appropriate Fora and it is the appropriate FORA, which has to pass appropriate order may be dismissing the appeal being time barred but the ministerial staff has no business or authority to return back the appeals filed with the remarks as has been done in the present case in terms of Annexure P-7. Therefore, on this account, this petition is allowed and the Annexure P-7 is quashed and set aside and the Authorities are directed to take on board the appeal filed by the petitioner and pass an appropriate order thereupon in accordance with law (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge December 22, 2025(meera)