Judgment A.M. Sapre, J Heard Mr. R. C. Paul, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. P. N. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department, appearing for the respondents. This is an intra-court appeal, under Rule 2(3) of Chapter VA of the Gauhati High Court Rules, filed by the writ petitioner of WP(C) No.2588 of 2012 against the order dated 23.08.2013 passed by learned Single Judge. By the impugned order, learned Single Judge dismissed the appellant’s writ petition and declined to grant him the relief which he had claimed in his writ petition. So the short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the appellant’s writ petition? Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record of the case we are inclined to allow the appeal in part and while setting aside of the impugned order remand the case to the writ Court for deciding the writ petition on merits, afresh. In our considered opinion, the need to remand the case to the Writ Court has occasioned because we find that the impugned order was passed in petitioner’s absence and without hearing him. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he could not appear because he was busy in some other case and by the time he reached, the order had been passed. In our view, having regard to nature of controversy and the fact that he suffered adverse order without hearing him, he is entitled for one indulgence in the writ proceedings and hence we are inclined to allow the appeal and while setting aside of the impugned order remand the case to the writ Court for deciding the writ petition afresh on merits in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to the writ petitioner. We, however, make it clear that we have not applied our mind to the merits of the controversy having formed an opinion to remand the case on the ground mentioned above. As a consequence, the appeal succeeds and is accordingly allowed in part. The impugned order is set aside and the writ petition out of which this appeal arises is restored to its file. The Registry is directed to list the writ petition before the writ court as per roster for its final hearing in accordance with law. As a consequence, the appeal succeeds and is accordingly allowed in part. The impugned order is set aside and the writ petition out of which this appeal arises is restored to its file. The Registry is directed to list the writ petition before the writ court as per roster for its final hearing in accordance with law. The Registry is directed to publish the names of all the counsel appearing for the parties in the writ petition. No cost.