JUDGMENT M. N. Bhandari, J. - By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 12 th January, 2017, whereby, an application submitted by the petitioners to take document on record has been dismissed. 2. It is a case where on a claim petition preferred by the petitioner, an award was passed somewhere in the year 2009. The petitioner preferred a civil misc. appeal before this court for enhancement of compensation. It was on the ground that prior to death of the deceased, out of an accident, the Revised Pay Scale Rules was made applicable thus needs to be taken into consideration by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal") for determination of future prospects. 3. This court, vide order dated 3 rd June, 2016, remanded the case on issue No.4 regarding determination of compensation. After remand of the case, petitioners made an application to take salary certificate of the deceased on record. The application aforesaid has been dismissed on the ground that this court had not granted any liberty to allow new evidence while remanding the case. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that an appeal was filed precisely due to non-consideration of future prospects in reference to the Revised Pay Scale Rules. The salary certificate issued by the employer should have been taken on record for proper determination of compensation. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that while remanding the case on appeal preferred by the petitioners, no liberty was given to produce new evidence and, otherwise, unless salary certificate is exhibited, it cannot be considered in evidence. 6. So far as determination of future prospects is concerned, it can be determined based on the material on record thus interference in the impugned order may not be made. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. It is not in dispute that after passing of the award, an appeal was preferred by the petitioners. It was allowed limited to the issue No.4 and, accordingly, matter was remanded to the Tribunal. The petitioners challenged the award on determination of quantum of compensation without taking future prospects. 8. It is not in dispute that after passing of the award, an appeal was preferred by the petitioners. It was allowed limited to the issue No.4 and, accordingly, matter was remanded to the Tribunal. The petitioners challenged the award on determination of quantum of compensation without taking future prospects. It was specifically in reference to the Revised Pay Scale Rules though order does not specify any of the grounds raised in the appeal for remand of the case other than to direct for re-determination of issue No.4 thus the matter was remanded to the Tribunal. When matter is remanded, it cannot be as an empty formality otherwise the Tribunal earlier itself determined the compensation based on material available on record and for that, it was not required to be remanded because this court, in appeal, is not restrained to determine the amount based on the material. 9. The purpose of remand of the case cannot be only to seek review of the order but to consider the issue raised in the appeal. It was specifically in reference to the Revised Pay Scale Rules. The hearing of the matter on issue No.4 would be an empty formality if issue raised in the appeal is not taken note of. If pay of the deceased was revised then document for it should have been taken on record to determine the compensation after taking into consideration the future prospects. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 12 th January, 2017 is set aside. The salary certificate has been issued by the employer and otherwise the Revised Pay Scale Rules have been notified thus cannot be questioned. Accordingly, the document aforesaid would be taken on record with acceptance of application. 10. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid.