JUDGMENT : Gopal Krishan Vyas, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that F.I.R. No. 33/2010 was filed for offence under Sections 199, 380, 383, 403 and 504 I.P.C. upon complaint filed by the petitioner in which after investigation, police filed F.I.R. (S/c.-F.R.) in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class No. 1, Sriganganagar but the said F.R. was accepted by the Magistrate in absence of the petitioner complainant and his advocate. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that against the said order of acceptance of F.R., a Revision Petition was filed by the petitioner before the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Sriganganagar from where it was transferred to the Court of Additional District Judge No. 1, Sriganganagar but the said Revisional Court dismissed the Revision Petition vide Order dated 29.9.2014 only on the ground that petitioner and his Counsel did not appear before the learned Magistrate to pursue his grounds for not accepting the F.R. but the order was challenged by the petitioner on merit, therefore, it was the duty of the Revisional Court to decide the Revision on merit to quash the order of Magistrate, whereby F.R. was accepted. 4. After perusing the order passed by the Additional District Judge No. 1, Sriganganagar in Revision Petition No. 22/2013 dated 29.9.2014, I am of the opinion that the Revision has been decided only on the ground that petitioner as well as his Counsel did not appear before the Magistrate and not on merit, therefore, the Revisional Court ought to have considered the case on merit, upon the grounds raised by the petitioner in the Revision Petition but it has not been done, therefore, the Order dated 29.9.2014 passed in Revision No. 22/2013 is here by quashed and the case is remitted to the Revisional Court to decide the Revision Petition on merit upon the ground raised by the petitioner in the Revision Petition within two months. The Miscellaneous Petition is allowed in above terms.