Petitioner does not want to file replica. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties finally at admission stage and perused record. 3. Petitioner has filed this revision petition along with application for condonation of delay of 487 days and submitted that appeal was dismissed in default on 20th March, 2012 and review petition along with application for condonation of delay was filed on 29-08-2012, which was dismissed on 25-04-2013, copy of which was received on 13-09-2013. Thus, it becomes clear that after receiving order of dismissal of review petition, revision has been filed within 35 days but review petition was filed after five months, in such circumstances, application for condonation of delay is allowed and delay stands condoned subject to cost of Rs.2,000/- to be paid to the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as petitioner has not seen cause list on website, he could not appear before State Commission and appeal was dismissed in default, which may be restored. Perusal of impugned order reveals that on the basis of uploading of cause list on website, appeal was dismissed in default. On number of occasions, we have observed that appeal should not have been dismissed in default on the basis of uploading of cause list on website and notices must have been served on the parties before proceeding further. In such circumstances, impugned order is liable to set aside. 5. Consequently, revision petition is allowed and impugned order dated 20th March, 2012 passed by learned State Commission in Appeal No. 2345/2008 – Union of India Vs. Smt. Sadhna Chaturvedi & Anr. is set aside and appeal is restored to its original number. State Commission is directed to decide appeal after giving an opportunity of being heard to both the parties. 6. Parties are directed to appear before State Commission on 07.10.2014. | 
