ORDER : Leave granted. 2. The legality and correctness of the order dated 12.04.2023, passed in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1101 of 2023 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, is assailed in this appeal. By the said order, the Writ Petition was dismissed and consequently the order dated 22.09.2022 passed by the State-Tax Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur, was sustained. Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellant herein before the Appellate Commissioner was dismissed both for non prosecution as well as on merits. Being aggrieved by the said orders, the appellant has preferred this appeal. 3. We have heard learned senior counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent(s)-State and perused the material on record. 4. By order dated 22.09.2022, the Appellate Commissioner dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein for non-prosecution for the reason that the appellant herein had not appeared on five occasions. While doing so, the Appellate Commissioner nevertheless heard only the Departmental Representative, State Tax Assistant Commissioner, Bettiah Circle, Bettiah on the merits of the appeal and dismissed the appeal on merits. In other words, without hearing the appellant, who had filed the appeal, on merits and by hearing only the Departmental Representative, while dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution owing to the absence of the appellant herein, nevertheless, dismissed the appeal on merits. This aspect has not been noted by the High Court while considering the Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1101 of 2023 in which the appellate order dated 22.09.2022 passed by the State – Tax Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Tirhut, Muzaffurpur, was assailed. The High Court simply noted that for as many as on five occasions the appellant before the Appellate Commissioner had remained absent and was not present to prosecute the appeal and therefore dismissed the writ petition. 5. We find that there has been violation of the principles of natural justice in the instant case inasmuch as the Appellate Commissioner could not have dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein on merits without hearing the appellant herein and by hearing only the Departmental Representative. The Appellate Commissioner may have been justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution owing to the consistent absence on behalf of the appellant herein. The Appellate Commissioner may have been justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution owing to the consistent absence on behalf of the appellant herein. But the principle and rule stated in Order XLI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ought to have been followed by the Appellate Commissioner who could not have therefore dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant herein on merits and without giving an opportunity to the appellant herein to make his submissions. 6. On that short ground alone, the impugned order order, dated 12.04.2023, passed in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1101 of 2023 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna and the Judgment dated 22.09.2022 passed by the State Tax Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Tirhut, Muzaffarpur, are set aside. The appeal filed by the appellant herein is restored on the file of the State – Tax Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Tirhut, Muzaffurpur. 7. However, we note that the appellant was consistently absent for as many as five times before the appellate commissioner. Therefore, while we grant relief to the appellant herein, at the same time, we impose costs of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) to be paid by the appellant herein, within a period of two weeks, to the Bihar State Legal Services Authority and the copy of the receipt shall be produced before the Appellate Commissioner. 8. This appeal is allowed and disposed of in the above said terms. 9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand closed.