Judgment :- 1. An appeal filed under S.61D of the Kerala Forest Act (for short "the Act") was dismissed by a District judge in the following words: "Appellant prays for adjournment of the appeal. Prayer is rejected. Appeal is dismissed. No costs.". The legality of the said judgment is challenged in this original petition filed under Art.227 of the Constitution. 2. Facts, in short, are these: A Divisional Forest Officer (the Authorised Officer) initiated proceedings under S.61 A of the Act in respect of a lorry and the load therein which were seized by the Forest Officials on 15-1-1986. As per Ext. P1 proceedings, the aforesaid authorised officer ordered confiscation of the said lorry as well as the contraband load. Petitioner claiming himself to be the owner of the lorry. challenged the order of confiscation by filing an appeal under S.61 the Act. The Appeal was taken on file and was numbered. When the appeal came up for arguments on 24-9-1987, learned District Judge passed the impugned judgment. 3. S.61-D of the Act is extracted below: "Any person aggrieved by any order passed under S.61-A or S.61-C may, within thirty days from the date of communication to him of such order, appeal to the District Judge having jurisdiction over the area in which the property to which the order relates has been seized and the District Judge shall, after giving an opportunity to the appellant to be heard, pass such order as he may think fit confirming, modifying or annulling the order appealed against". 4. The District Judge is to act as persona designata and is duty bound to decide the appeal. He has to exercise a jurisdiction which should end in "confirming, modifying or annulling the order appealed against". Subsection (2) shows that the order passed by the District Judge shall be final. A dismissal of appeal, merely on the ground that the counsel for the appellant did not address arguments, amounts to non-exercise of jurisdiction conferred on the District Judge. The section requires that an opportunity to the appellant should be granted. If the opportunity granted is not availed of by the appellant, the consequence is that the appeal may have to be decided without the aid of arguments of the appellant. Jurisdiction conferred on the District Judge empowers him to re-assess, re-appreciate or re-evaluate the evidence and materials. It is co-extensive with that of the authorised officer. If the opportunity granted is not availed of by the appellant, the consequence is that the appeal may have to be decided without the aid of arguments of the appellant. Jurisdiction conferred on the District Judge empowers him to re-assess, re-appreciate or re-evaluate the evidence and materials. It is co-extensive with that of the authorised officer. District Judge can come to his independent finding in order to confirm or modify or annul the order in such manner as he thinks fit. Counsel's reluctance to argue the appeal, or absence of the appellant and his counsel on the date fixed for arguments would not permit the District Judge to dismiss the appeal without deciding it on merits. There is no provision in the Act similar to R.11 (2) or R.17 of 0.41 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Such provisions are not made applicable to the Act either. Hence, once the District Judge treats an appeal as having been validly presented, it cannot be struck off without deciding the appeal on merits. 5. Learned Government Pleader conceded that the dismissal of appeal without deciding it on merits is not in accordance with law. Hence this original petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself. The impugned judgment is therefore quashed and the District Judge shall dispose of the appeal afresh in accordance with law. Issue carbon copies of this judgment on usual terms.