JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL)

1.      This order shall decide three above said revision petitions.

2.      Learned counsel for the petitioner present.  Shri Naveen Kumar, respondent in revision petition No. 940 of 2014 and Shri Subodh Kumar Thakur respondent in revision petition No. 941 of 2014 are present.  The third respondent in revision petition No. 942 of 2014, namely, Ms. Pushplata is absent.  She has moved an application and has authorized her husband, Shri Subodh Kumar Thakur to contest her case.  Her application has been placed on record.  Arguments heard.

3.      In all the three cases, similar order was passed by the State Commission.  We take up the order from revision petition No. 940 of 2014-My College of Education vs. Naveen Kumar.  The impugned order runs as follows:

                   “25.11.2013

                   FA-681/13

                   Present :  None for the Appellant

                                    Respondent in person.

The appeal is fixed for hearing on delay condonation application.  Neither appellant nor his counsel present despite repeated calls to press this delay condonation application.  The delay condonation application is dismissed.  In consequence whereof the appeal is also dismissed as time barred.”

4.      Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ex parte order was passed against the petitioner before the District Forum because no summons were issued to him.  Warning bells should have rung after the ex parte order was passed against the petitioner, yet it did not appear before the first appellate court as well.

5.      On 25.11.2013, the only purpose of the petitioner is to delay the case unnecessarily and harass the  respondents to the maximum extent.  It is also transpired that no order for the litigation charges which were granted by this Commission was passed due to inadvertence.

6.      Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby set aside the order passed by the State Commission and give an opportunity to the petitioner as well as the respondents to place their case before the State Commission, subject to payment of Rs.7,500/- as costs in each case, which be paid to the respondents through demand draft.  The State Commission shall decide the appeal on merits.  The parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 27.3.2014.  The State Commission will hear and decide the case after satisfying that the costs stand paid to the respondents.

          All the revision petitions stand disposed of.